This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Refuting supernatural

jay29's Avatar Jump to comment 7 by jay29

Jos Gibbons writes " A: Do you believe in the supernatural? B: That term's vague; but, since to believe in the supernatural I'd have to believe in some specific supernatural thing, let's see if you can name a single example of one for which evidence exists. All other beliefs are unwarranted. I won't ask you to prove it counts as supernatural, or to give a definition thereof; but I'm sure whatever example you'd have in mind will be unevidenced. If they have a decent comeback to that, call a press conference." Unfortunately, Jos commits, implicitly, a logical fallacy here, an argumentum ad ignorantiam: there is no evidence for x therefore x is false. And, of course, it isn't true that there is "no evidence" for the supernatural, rather one might say that the status of the evidence offered (arguments for religion, Biblical claims etc..) is contentious, i.e. there is disagreement concerning whether the evidence is good or bad. Perhaps Jos needs to call that press conference! Jay

Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:13:02 UTC | #948993