Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone
If no evidence exists pertaining to something's existence, the automatic stance pretty much everyone takes is a negative. There's no reason that God should be given any special treatment. If I'm God Agnostic, I have to be Giant Cheese agnostic and everything else agnostic too.
|
Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging possibilities. For example, even if I say that fairies, flying pigs, or even a Giant Swiss Cheese crossing over the Atlantic might exist, the fact is that the chance remains astronomically low in the absence of evidence. Given such a low probability, there's really no reason to reject any claims outright since such claims are much too unlikely to influence any sort of change in thought. Take note that skepticism is a neutral position rather than a negative one, so indiscriminate rejection is no different from covering your ears to anything outside your own perspective.
Claims of "possibility" or "impossibility" can only be used relative to a particular framework. As such, insistence on claiming the impossibility of something is to claim the infallibility of a particular knowledge construct.