Burden of proof (philosophy)

Can you prove that Zeus does not or never existed? You mean you believe it because someone told you it was drivel, go ahead prove it.

 

No need since the burden of proof clearly lies with the one making the claim, I need take no position, I lack a belief in Zeus. Simples.

The drivel was your sudden invention of a vote!

 

Again you stated you took no position.

I never claimed God exists, or does not exist, I never took a position.
I neither affirmed nor denied the existence or nonexistence of deities.

You can argue with yourself if you so wish, but no position is usually considered no belief, and you clearly stated it.

 

I know you are an atheist toward Zeus, we got that.

 

Excellent, glad we are finally in agreement and you understand Lack of Belief.

 

Thanks for proving me correct.

 

well then how come every philosopher on the planet disagrees with you?
the only person who does not make a claim positive or negative about God is an agnostic.
Atheists deny God exists, and that is a claim, sorry

 

You were correct, lets review what you wrote,

I never claimed God exists, or does not exist, I never took a position.
I neither affirmed nor denied the existence or nonexistence of deities.

So no position or belief regarding Zeus, an atheist view.

 

false, I believe its unknowable, last time I checked thats a belief in the real world, not an atheist view by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Then you have now taken a position, which contradicts your original statement.

 

In the dispute either for or against. duh!

 

In the dispute you clearly state you have taken no position, now you claim you have. Again writing duh, does not help your position, even if it makes you feel better.