• 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    well no, we know it because non-existence is the default status quo. if you want to claim there is a spaghetti monster running the world, the burden of proof is on your side, no one has a responsibility to prove you it is nonsense.

    so the effort of all these very smart people trying to find god would only be of interest if they had actually find him… in which case he should be handcuffed and brought to hague.

    • Lemming6969@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I think you may be conflating burden of proof with the effort involved in that burden. Without a rigorous effort, the default claim is less strong and has not stood up to scrutiny. While it may seem too obvious for such things, we now know that science and physics can get really weird and complex… So ideas like “I think therefore I am”, first cause / Kalam, all the way to modern logic and number theory, all bolster claims of Occam’s Razor violation in a rigorous way instead of hand waving. We can think the outcome is certain and a waste of time, but really out of it has come some fundamental and valuable research into logic.