Yesterday someone left this comment on my post, "Sorry. No winner in 'Tell me why you believe in God contest.'"
There are arguments for theism. There are arguments for atheism. The failure of arguments for one side, does not mean that the other position is true by default. There is no "presumption of atheism" or "presumption of theism."
The commenter is completely wrong. What they said lacks any foundation in logic, reason, or direct experience.
I talk about this a lot on this blog. Almost always there's no way to prove the non-existence of something. What we do in both science and everyday life is demand proof that something exists.
If you say, "There's an invisible pink elephant standing on the sidewalk," it's absurd to consider that this statement is as believable as "There's no invisible pink elephant standing on the sidewalk."
Why? Because once we assume that things unseen and unprovable possess as much reality as things seen and provable, we've lost touch with reality.
That's another word for psychosis.
Now, it's unlikely the commenter is psychotic. They just have a deficiency in clear thinking, which is very different from being mentally ill.
That's why I'm writing this post -- to help them, and others, understand where they are going wrong in their approach to reality.
Glad to help! That's what we do here at the Church of the Churchless, help bring people back into touch with reality after wandering in the desert of religious delusion.
Hey, I've been a wanderer myself before I understood in what direction truth lies.
Atheism is the presumptive truth because there is no demonstrable evidence that any of the thousands of gods theorized to exist actually does. Atheism simply means "no theism" or "no god."
Likewise, no invisible pink elephants is the presumptive truth because there is no demonstrable evidence that such creatures exist -- except in the minds of people who claim that they see them.