“I am unconvinced”.This is a conclusion without a premise, and it looks like this in argument form:
IF [ Q ], THEN [ “I am unconvinced” ].The Atheist will stalwartly refuse to reveal what Q might entail as a premise. And in fact, there is no Q. The reason that the Atheist invokes this non-argument is that he has made a conclusion based only on emotional neediness, and certainly not on any rational premise, Q.
But what is Q?
When the opponent of the Atheist demands to see Q, that demand is the Burden of Rebuttal which is placed on the Atheist. The denial of having such a burden is the most common response, and the proponents of this attack on the rational process are legion across the web. But the Burden of Rebuttal is the rational demand to see the premises for the Atheist argument. Denial of that is merely a part of the chronic avoidance endemic to Atheism.
Others might go an extra step into the Atheist intellectual abyss with statements like these: “There is no case”; or “theists haven’t proven their case”. The first statement is false, blatantly so. The second statement demands this response:
IF [ P ], THEN [ “theists haven’t proven their case” ];They have merely moved the empty, unsupported conclusion deeper into the Atheist intellectual abyss.
WHAT IS P?
Because they have no Q and no P, they are maintaining an Anti-Rational position, in the manner of Nietzsche. And in the manner of Nietzsche also, they begin to assert bullying tactics (Will To Power) in order to appear to be maintaining control, including declaring - without evidence - that all accusations against themselves are fallacies:
IF [ R ], Then [ “All your accusations are fallacies” ].But once again the conclusion is an emotional desire, not an objective fact and they will never produce any evidence, R, to support their charge.
It always deteriorates from this point because the Atheist has no rational base from which to operate, so the conversation becomes an emotional mess.
I have yet to meet an Atheist who has studied logic and cares about it enough to submit himself to it. Submission is not a characteristic of the narcissism and elitism which are acquired by Atheists in the great Atheist VOID. In fact, it is the inverse; Atheists come to sites like this, not to exercise logical argumentation, but to assert their own elitism and to feed their ravenous egos. Narcissism is not a fun place to be, because it does require massive ego-feeding.
I suspect that coming to a site like this one ultimately takes a toll on the narcissist ego, which gets exercised, bruised, and not fed here. So many of them alight here for a short while and then flit off never to be seen again. There are plenty of other sites to which they can retreat and refuel their egos by associating with other self-endowed elitists. A narcissist might be wounded, but will never discard his narcissism. Narcissism has no cure. Nor does elitism. Nor does Atheism, unless it is caught before the VOID asserts itself and removes rationality completely from the individual’s worldview.