[IronUnkind]

I only brought up Occam's Razor because part of the classical atheist position has been the denial of burden of proof with the attendant appeal to this principle. Even if I were to concede that the burden of proof was upon the theist, I would hope that the atheist would not allow themselves to merely sit back and refute. I would not expect someone who self-identified as an agnostic to avoid the actual discussion.

My use of the term "avoidance mechanism," incidentally, was just a bit of rhetoric. I doubt that most atheists are somewhere twisting their moustaches and trying to avoid the question. But though they have the purest of motives, it just so happens that talk of burden of proof tends to stifle the dialogue.

[ QUOTE ]
Skeptics (I count myself in here) have no belief about god because its their nature not to form beliefs without a reason. Its not a choice or an avoidance mechanism either, they are incapable of believing something without a reason.

Credulous people (is their a word like skeptic for them) have to form a belief about anything they consider, even if there is no reason for it. This is not a choice either.

I assume most people fall between the two extremes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps this is a semantic issue. I say that the position of curious neutrality is best on most topics. Skeptics tend to overemphasize the unlikelihood of a proposition, while credulists (is this a neologism?) tend to overemphasize its likelihood.