The rational - intelligent - position is to make an allowance for the possibility something may be provable, until such time as it is disproved (to the best of our knowledge at the time) - no matter the likelihood.
Nope. That's just
your position, not one of rational people. I've already showed you examples of how and why non-belief is the default position. No one is saying "reject every possibility until adequate evidence is shown", which is the straw man argument you're fighting against. It's not the argument I'm making and you know that, or you really are just that dense.... I'd like to think you're not that stupid.
Skeptics can still entertain ideas as possible even without evidence. You prattle on about 'string theory' like you have an idea about what it is, yet there's
no evidence to support it. It's an attempt to unify Electromagnetic theory and quantum theory, which it
hasn't done yet. Does it mean it's false? Not necessarily, it means the jury is still out and belief should be suspended until further evidence/calculations/experiments/etc., have been conducted.
Because it is still possible.
You entertain all possibilities as equal. That's just retarded.
What is not rational - nor intelligent - is to dismiss that possibility outright.
No one has done this. This is
your claim, not mine. What is more important is assigning a probability to beliefs so that false beliefs may be rooted out, and true beliefs may continue on. I still don't think you understand that non-belief is not necessarily the rejection of a belief, only the suspension of belief pending further evidence.
Going back to the example about superpowers;
If you tell me you have superhuman strength, and I say "I don't believe you", it doesn't mean I reject any possibility of you having superhuman strength it means I haven't seen justification for that belief yet.
God damn, you're slow! You keep making the same fucking argument about the same fucking thing, and it's ridiculoius. You're not even arguing about the points I'm making, you're just making up an argument to fight against to make it seem like you're contributing something to the discussion.
A truly rational person wouldn't be so closed-minded. Because closed-mindedness is . . . irrational. There is absolutely no reason to dismiss something if you have no proof, because nothing is yet proven, so it is not conclusive.
Close-mindedness is not entertaining an idea regardless of the evidence that supports it. That's not what I'm, or anyone on here, is doing. Again, that is the argument you are choosing to fight against, not the argument I'm making. If you want to have a real discussion I'm all ears - but you are compelled to continually create your own straw man to fight against.
People need to be open-minded enough to entertain radical new ideas, but not so open-minded that their brain falls out. Your brain? Is on the floor....
You're basing your conclusive opinion (and again it's just your opinion - you clearly don't decide what is rational or otherwise) on a likelihood, not a possibility.
Conclusive opinion? Nothing is certain, only different levels of probability, so I'm not sure what you mean. It's possible for virtually every rule in science to be turned on its head tomorrow, but based on the evidence we have today, it's very unlikely. Why do you keep making straw man arguments? Is this the only way you can have a discussion? By putting words in peoples mouths, and then arguing against things they didn't say?
It is likely when you spin a roulette wheel the number "0" won't come up - but it is still possible. Yet both of you would still try to rationalise the possibility of "0" never coming up because a) the likelihood is small and b) you have not witnessed it yet.
Another straw man argument. I would not rationalize zero not coming up, where do you get this bullshit from?? You can fucking see it on the board, there are 36 numbers and the 00 has a 1-36 chance of happening. It's demonstrable and testable, and as such has been demonstrated and tested many, many times.
Just stop doing examples. You obviously haven't thought them through.
Does that mean it will never happen? There is still the likelihood it will never happen - even at odds of 36:1, you could spin a roulette wheel until the end of time and "0" may never come up. There are no guarantees - there are only possibilities.
The likelihood of that happening, spinning a roulette wheel infinitely and never getting 00, is so small that for practical purposes you could call it impossible; even though the possibility does exist that 00 never comes up the chances of that happening are so minuscule it's not worth considering. In other words,
​there is no good reason to believe that if run a roulette table infinitely that 00 would never come up. Possible? Yes. But so astronomically small it's stupid to consider in any meaningful way.
The only people who have "default positions" are those with only two positions: yes/no; right/wrong; belief/non-belief.
You have listed dichotomies (other than right/wrong which is subjective). There is no answer outside of yes/no. If I ask "Does 2+2=4?", it either does or it doesn't. There is no 'in between' answer, because it's a dichotomy. What answer for that question fits between yes or no? There isn't one. Even if you didn't know if 2+2=4, the answer would still be 'yes'. Your knowledge of the answer doesn't affect the truth statement about 2+2=4.
The same goes with belief. You either believe or you don't believe, there is no in between. You either believe Santa is real, or you do not. "I don't know" is not an answer when it's regarding beliefs, as "I don't know" is a
knowledge claim not a belief claim. No one is asking if you
know if god exists, people are asking if you
believe god exists.
I'm not one of them. But it must be comforting to live in such a simple world as yours, where you can be so sure about everything.
Again, another straw man argument. No one has claimed anything to do with certainty,
that's your own argument against yourself.
Does it feel good to make up arguments no one is stating then attempt to beat them up? lol
The world is anything but simple, not sure why you're bringing up the complexity of the universe now.
Alien life has located us among the trillions of planets in our galaxy alone.
