IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Underlined: Russell's teapot. |
"Russell's teapot"? Really? Hilarious.
Belief and understanding of the afterlife is not something based in facts or empirical evidence or, I accept this.
You however, place value in 'facts' i.e. empirical evidence, so the burden is on you to produce facts in this argument to support your belief. The fact is, both of our claims are unfalsifiable, but you are the one that places value in empirical evidence, and you are the one that must therefore produce 'facts' for your own argument, by your very own claim, to be valid.
But you cannot, so you defer to a rather ridiculous philosophical concept to make your lack of an argument seem acceptable.