An assertion that something does not exist does not need to be proven, since it is inherently a challenge to someone else’s assertion to something existing.
A negative can not be proven, if someone wishes to insist that a concept be considered, the burden of evidence fall upon them.
That’s quite an oversimplification. What you’re really asserting is that sentience has no part which is very difficult if not impossible to directly measure. You can throw your hands in the air and pretend you’ve not made any such claim, but you have. It’s bizarre how many atheists display the same levels of dogmatism and fervour as their religious counterparts.
P.S. pretty odd that you felt the need to condescendingly imply I’d think talking to some kind of ghost elephant is equally plausible as not knowing the entire nature of the universe.
An assertion that something does not exist does not need to be proven, since it is inherently a challenge to someone else’s assertion to something existing.
A negative can not be proven, if someone wishes to insist that a concept be considered, the burden of evidence fall upon them.
That’s quite an oversimplification. What you’re really asserting is that sentience has no part which is very difficult if not impossible to directly measure. You can throw your hands in the air and pretend you’ve not made any such claim, but you have. It’s bizarre how many atheists display the same levels of dogmatism and fervour as their religious counterparts.
P.S. pretty odd that you felt the need to condescendingly imply I’d think talking to some kind of ghost elephant is equally plausible as not knowing the entire nature of the universe.
So… you define the concept of soul as being comparable with sentience?
Do you mean sentience or sapience?
They don’t know what they mean, they’re just regurgitating entry-level thought experiments.