I will be improperly using "their" as a unisex pronoun for simplicity's sake.
When an atheist asks a proselytizing theist for evidence for their god claim, the theist may continuously "move the goalposts."
"Moving the goalposts is an informal logical fallacy in which previously agreed upon standards for deciding an argument are arbitrarily changed once they have been met. This is usually done by the "losing" side of an argument in a desperate bid to save face. If the goalposts are moved far enough, then the standards can eventually evolve into something that cannot be met no matter what. Usually such a tactic is spotted quickly." -http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts
In other words, this tactic is an attempt to achieve a definition of a god that is unfalsifiable. The problem for theists is that their positive assertion of God's existence also cannot be proven at this point.
Since the burden of proof lies with the person making the positive claim the advantage of unfalsifiability will belong to the agnostics (http://957chatterton.blogspot.com/2012/06/i-am-agnostic-atheist.html). Many theists, however, will attempt to shift the burden of proof as if the specific belief in a specific god with specific characteristics were the default position.
This tactic can be easily combated by citing other unfalsifiable assertions.
"There is an invisible, intangible, heatless, soundless, and weightless pink unicorn name 'Muffin Fuck' standing behind you right now. Prove me wrong."
"There is a giant space-faring duck that feasts on magnetic poles. Prove me wrong."
"The Flying Spaghetti Monster is real. Prove me wrong."
"There's a hamster that can speak and says 'you're welcome' when I thank her for retweeting my blog posts. Prove me wrong." @Secularjen
The theist may accuse the atheist of not taking the discussion seriously. In that case, the atheist can give them a painfully realistic scenario.
"There's a radical Muslim that says his god wants him to kill you. Prove him wrong."
Once the theist figures out that the burden of proof lies with them, there's a good chance you will hear them argue Pascal's Wager (http://957chatterton.blogspot.com/2012/05/pascals-wager-massive-failure-of-logic.html)
Here are few easy ways to show them why Pascal's wager won't cut it.
"What if we're both wrong about God and there's a heaven that only atheists get to go to and everyone else goes to Hell?"
"What if the Muslims (or whatever else) are right? Then we'll both go to Hell."
The next one is my favorite.
"What if Satan wrote the bible and you end up in Hell for it while I, someone who doesn't 'buy' the Bible, gets to go to heaven?"
At the end of all of this, you'll likely get one of two responses.
Translation: "I give up but I want to save face while I'm running away."
I usually just say, "I prefer good reasons." and walk away.
When someone resorts to petty name-calling and baseless accusations, it means they have no valid points to make.
Conclusion:
If you are a religious proselytizer and you start moving the goalposts on me, I will simply walk away as none of you have ever given me a reason to stay.
If you are an atheist, familiarize yourself with logical fallacies so you can arm yourself against flawed thinking and deceit.
"Moving the goalposts is an informal logical fallacy in which previously agreed upon standards for deciding an argument are arbitrarily changed once they have been met. This is usually done by the "losing" side of an argument in a desperate bid to save face. If the goalposts are moved far enough, then the standards can eventually evolve into something that cannot be met no matter what. Usually such a tactic is spotted quickly." -http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts
In other words, this tactic is an attempt to achieve a definition of a god that is unfalsifiable. The problem for theists is that their positive assertion of God's existence also cannot be proven at this point.
Since the burden of proof lies with the person making the positive claim the advantage of unfalsifiability will belong to the agnostics (http://957chatterton.blogspot.com/2012/06/i-am-agnostic-atheist.html). Many theists, however, will attempt to shift the burden of proof as if the specific belief in a specific god with specific characteristics were the default position.
This tactic can be easily combated by citing other unfalsifiable assertions.
"There is an invisible, intangible, heatless, soundless, and weightless pink unicorn name 'Muffin Fuck' standing behind you right now. Prove me wrong."
"There is a giant space-faring duck that feasts on magnetic poles. Prove me wrong."
"The Flying Spaghetti Monster is real. Prove me wrong."
"There's a hamster that can speak and says 'you're welcome' when I thank her for retweeting my blog posts. Prove me wrong." @Secularjen
The theist may accuse the atheist of not taking the discussion seriously. In that case, the atheist can give them a painfully realistic scenario.
"There's a radical Muslim that says his god wants him to kill you. Prove him wrong."
Once the theist figures out that the burden of proof lies with them, there's a good chance you will hear them argue Pascal's Wager (http://957chatterton.blogspot.com/2012/05/pascals-wager-massive-failure-of-logic.html)
Here are few easy ways to show them why Pascal's wager won't cut it.
"What if we're both wrong about God and there's a heaven that only atheists get to go to and everyone else goes to Hell?"
"What if the Muslims (or whatever else) are right? Then we'll both go to Hell."
The next one is my favorite.
"What if Satan wrote the bible and you end up in Hell for it while I, someone who doesn't 'buy' the Bible, gets to go to heaven?"
At the end of all of this, you'll likely get one of two responses.
- "Well, you just gotta have faith!"
Translation: "I give up but I want to save face while I'm running away."
I usually just say, "I prefer good reasons." and walk away.
- The theist will launch an Ad Hominem attack against the atheist.
When someone resorts to petty name-calling and baseless accusations, it means they have no valid points to make.
Conclusion:
If you are a religious proselytizer and you start moving the goalposts on me, I will simply walk away as none of you have ever given me a reason to stay.
If you are an atheist, familiarize yourself with logical fallacies so you can arm yourself against flawed thinking and deceit.
Thank you for reading! Feel free to comment, share, and subscribe!
