The Idiocy of Demanding ‘Evidence’ not Arguments or Reasoning

Amongst today’s atheists, there is a moronic atheistic meme in circulation (exemplified, for example, by KIA in a comment to my last post) which demands that the Christian theist (or just the theist) provide “evidence” for his claims rather than just “arguments” or “reasoning”, and the reason that such a request rests upon a peak of stupidity is because for some fact or observation or piece of data to count as evidence for one hypothesis (H1) over  another (H2)(and there are always multiple hypotheses that can be articulated to account for the data in question), the fact or observation or piece of data needs to be more likely / more expected (less surprising) on the first hypothesis (H1) rather than second (H2), and only then can it count as evidence for the hypothesis in question (H1), all of which means that a fact or piece of data does not become ‘evidence’ without ‘argument’ or ‘reasoning’ that it is more likely or expected on one hypothesis over another, which is precisely why, in a criminal trial, the prosecution and defense counsel ‘argue’ and ‘reason’ about different facts or data in order to determine whether those facts or data do or do not count as ‘evidence’ for the charge made against the accused, and so to demand “evidence” without ‘reasoning’ or ‘arguments’ is about as idiotic as demanding testimony without ‘speaking’ or ‘writing’ or ‘communication’; and so, in light of this, it is no great shock that certain atheists never see “evidence” for God given that, as my previous post argued, they are always willing to find a non-theistic explanation, no matter how ridiculous, more likely and expected for some fact than a theistic explanation, so it is thus no surprise, and no great point of note or worry that some atheists never accept anything as evidence for God, for such is to be entirely expected given the mental make-up of such atheists (and as a further and final side-note, the atheistic demand for “evidence” rather than arguments or reasoning is doubly funny given that an argument, such as a deductive argument, is more certain than some piece of evidence is, and so providing an argument is actually more powerful than simply providing a piece of evidence (as opposed to a full cumulative case), which is why deductive argumentation should be intellectually preferred to a mere piece of evidence).


4 thoughts on “The Idiocy of Demanding ‘Evidence’ not Arguments or Reasoning

  1. arguments and reasoning unsupported by evidence is not evidence in itself, but assertion and attempts to convince others to believe. you may be able to convince people to believe, as i was convinced for 34 years and in turn convinced others as a minister for 25 of that, but arguments and reasoning unsupported by evidence are not evidence.
    just because you can convince someone of something by arguments and reasoning, doesn’t make it evidenced truth. there are many ‘believers’ of islam or Buddha or Vishnu that are equally convinced by the arguments and reasoning of their faiths, but you wouldn’t dare count that as Truth. no, you would examine the evidence for their claims and historicity and founding documents for accuracy, as i have for my own former faith, and find them utterly lacking in Evidence to support their claims.
    just think of all the flat earthers, moon landing hoaxers, newage channellers, believers in alien landings and the rest. you dismiss them out of hand by the evidence they don’t have, regardless of the arguments and reasonings they bring to the table. arguments and reasonings are meant to be ‘explanations’ of evidence, not evidence itself.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Kia;
    You and I have marched over this land before. And done so as many times as I can remember. And, it’s always the same. Evidence ! The fact is neither side has now, or ever will have, sufficient evidence to win over the other side.

    Were we able to take it down a notch or two we would probably say it comes down to faith. My faith that God exists and the Bible is truth and your faith in His non-existence and the Bible nothing more than a fable. Which again comes to the issue of evidence supporting either position sufficient to win over the opposition.

    I can tell you there are two truths in this world of which are self evident. And the world itself holds testament to it. That there is good and there is evil. Representing good is what people for thousands of years have called “God.” And man has designated evil to be represented by “Satan” (the devil).

    We need no more evidence than to pick up a newspaper or turn on the television to know good and evil exist. The world itself attests to this fact.It’s only a stone’s throw from there to associate God with good and evil with Satan through faith.

    Now you can say there is no faith – but then you’d be denying your own confidence that God doesn’t exist….. for it’s by faith that you believe that.

    May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob bless and keep you and yours.


  3. I have told you before, I am not atheist, just not Christian anymore. Why is it that anyone who doesn’t hold your beliefs is only atheist? Are you unable or unwilling to dialogue with those you disagree with in an honest and respectful way?


  4. ”there are many ‘believers’ of islam or Buddha or Vishnu that are equally convinced by the arguments and reasoning”

    They are convinced of the existence of a creator-type God,and then go on to believe in the God of their own religion.

    The arguments for the existence of a God are not meant to point specifically to the Christian God,or Islamic God,but to the existence of a supreme/divine being that these religions call ”God”.

    But in order to come to the conclusion it is the Christian God,Muslim God or another god,they use more specific arguments to do that.

    Another thing is,I doubt that Buddha can be described as a monotheistic god,considering the differences between the monotheistic/Abrahamic conceptions of God and the way Buddha is described.

    ”just think of all the flat earthers, moon landing hoaxers, newage channellers, believers in alien landings and the rest.”

    There are some Christians who actually believe that actual extra-terrestrial aliens exist and have contacted the Earth.

    Others believe such sightings are genuine but they are caused by more ”demonic” forces.Same goes for channelers.

    And let’s not forget some Christians do indeed believe the Moon Landing was a hoax.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s