since Red and I have been discussing this subject I've given it more thought and if we are thinking about this in a strictly historical and traditional definition of where the burden of proof lies then I would agree that common knowledge assumes that the burden of proof falls upon the one who first claims to believe. my point all along has been that as soon as someone voices disagreement to a point that cannot be supported by evidence, they take on burden of proof to support their disbelief with evidence of why. it works both ways. aliens is actually a good analogy imo. we have no proof of their existence yet we also have no evidence that they do not exist. one can neither prove nor disprove their existence. as Mancha very eloquently said previously, there are subjects to abstract and complex for us to provide a simple Yes or No answer and I agree that this is one of them. as humans we are severely limited by our perspective, like the ant atop a giant beach ball who believes his world is flat. where our perspective and understanding end, we are left with faith....or not, both of which represent the same thing, a belief which cannot be proven.
Right, however, where do you draw the line, is it not feasible to also say green furry wood sprites also either exist or don't exist? I mean where do we say, ok.....maybe the burden of proof does fall on the person that believes something exists, right? Because until there is proof something exists it technically doesn't, the idea of that (insert mythological creature or deity here) may exist but no proof.
If I believe in something and I want to convince you to believe in it too then the burden of proof falls upon me. If I believe in something and I don't give a damn whether you believe it or not then there is no burden of proof.
I continue to disagree. If one chooses not to believe in myths, Gods, aliens, or unicorns it requires no proof to do so. Disbelievers are not required to "take on the burden of proof". If proof existed they would acknowledge it. Burden of proof is always on the claimant.
It would go for everything that can't be empirically proven. For example I don't want to believe that LSU got beat 41-7 by Auburn but there is no denying it. If you want to convince me that wood sprites exist you're going to have to show me one. And not a bar of Woodsprite Olive Oil Soap http://www.woodspriteorganicbody.com/
The team exists, however, down 24 to Wisconsin, why on Earth would anyone believe that we could come back and win? Faith bra! Faith!!
