It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: auto3000
a reply to: Revolution9
Good point...
originally posted by: deliberator
a reply to: Prezbo369
I don't agree. From an atheism thread of mine a few months ago.
Belief does not have to be based on blind faith. It can also be based on logic, rationality, probability, evidences etc An example would be a jury who find somebody guilty of murder. They may ‘believe’ the person is guilty but they cannot prove it beyond any doubt. They can accept philosophical argument e.g. finding a motive. They can accept evidence eg finding the offenders fingerprints on a weapon. They can infer probability. In other words the jury have no clear indisputable evidence but can employ philosophy, logic and evidence to base their belief on. This is not the same as simply having faith, rather faith based on intellectual and convincing grounds. If the accused stated he was framed, the same methods can be used to arrive at the belief that he is either telling the truth or not telling the truth.