DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**c6vkuNRg** · 05-26-2008, 03:55 PM

skeptics usually look for false evidence, so they generally find it.
believers, likewise, look for evidence to support their beliefs, and so they too, generally find it.

so why do you need to prove the [non]existance of a thing at all?? as q'uo once said, in time/space beliefs and concepts are every bit as real as the table or the chair, but we simply don't see that in space/time.

it seems to me that there is as much obligation on the part of the skeptic to prove a thing does not exist, as the believer has to prove its existence. so if i get confronted by this, i simply say that i believe in its existence, and if you would like to convince me otherwise, then prove to me that it does not exist, and i will gladly share your belief.

05-26-2008, 03:55 PM	#2
c6vkuNRg Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 361 Senior Member	skeptics usually look for false evidence, so they generally find it. believers, likewise, look for evidence to support their beliefs, and so they too, generally find it. so why do you need to prove the [non]existance of a thing at all?? as q'uo once said, in time/space beliefs and concepts are every bit as real as the table or the chair, but we simply don't see that in space/time. it seems to me that there is as much obligation on the part of the skeptic to prove a thing does not exist, as the believer has to prove its existence. so if i get confronted by this, i simply say that i believe in its existence, and if you would like to convince me otherwise, then prove to me that it does not exist, and i will gladly share your belief.
	Quote