more on this theme | more from this text
Full Idea
If someone claimed a patch of land was tended by a 'gardener', but there was never a shred of evidence to support this view, the claim would gradually dissolve into meaninglessness, especially if it was suggested that evidence was irrelevant.
Gist of Idea
You can't claim a patch of land is tended by a 'gardener' if there is no evidence, and all counter-evidence is rejected
Source
report of Antony Flew (Theology and Falsification [1950]) by PG - Db (ideas)
Book Ref
'The Existence of God', ed/tr. Hick,John [Macmillan 1964], p.225
| 1466 | Claims about God don't seem to claim or deny anything tangible, so evidence is irrelevant [Flew, by PG] |
| 1465 | You can't claim a patch of land is tended by a 'gardener' if there is no evidence, and all counter-evidence is rejected [Flew, by PG] |
| 1467 | Religious people seem unwilling to accept any evidence that God does not love us, so their claim is unfalsifiable [Flew, by PG] |