Quote:
|
Originally Posted by asaris
You miss my point. God is the being than which none greater can be conceived, right? Well, if that's the case, and he exists, it at least makes sense to think that he's beyond our perception. There's no reason to think that pink unicorns are beyond our perception. Plus, see what I said above about evidence. There's evidence that God exists; you might not think it to be very good, but there's evidence. There's no evidence that pink unicorns exist. Keep in mind that evidence does not equal proof.
|
You are correct, there is no reason to think that pink unicorns are beyond our perception. However, there is no reason to think that they arn't either. There is nothing for or against pink unicorns. Therefore, like god, they are an article of faith.
The distinction I was trying to make is that people are somehow able to remain agnostic towards god, and yet, are able to come to a conclution about pink unicorns. How this conclution is made without any evidence is beyond me. If you're agnostic towards god, then you have to be agnostic towards pink unicorns- neither entity has any proof going left or right about them.
Also, I'm confused as to how evidence is different than proof. Could you elaborate?