Originally Posted by Mike Doolittle
What you consider "objective evidence" is a concept constrained by the tenants of the naturalistic axiom. "I cannot observe anything outside of my room by observing my room, thus nothing outside of my room exists." You're supporting one assumption with another.
For me, the question is not "Is there anything outside my room?" rather "Why shouldn't there be anything outside my room?" (Likewise, why shouldn't the tree which falls in a forest make a sound?) My premise is that there is because there has never not been something outside my room.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you're going to tell me that we are all living in simulated reality then the burden of proof lies on you to prove it. Otherwise, if I were to take that claim on face value, then I would have to accept any old claim that the human mind could conjure. (Suddenly the simulated reality which is being operated by the agent is itself a simulated reality, and so on and so on.)
What I'm saying is that my belief in an "outside of my room while inside my room" is difference from a belief of an afterlife. That no "objective evidence" (as you put it) can be demonstrated for either claim does not mean that each claim is equally plausible. Further, while I may not be able to objectively prove that there is anything to see while being blindfolded, I can always take the blindfold off. Or, in other words, the conditions by which you've demanded evidence made it impossible to demonstrate said evidence. That there is an "outside of my room" is a testable claim; the addendum of "while inside my room" makes it untestable (though something
must be causing me to turn my heater on). That there is an afterlife or "creative god" is not testable by any means, only a mere supposition once you've dictated the so-called boundaries of reason.
In summation, all "faiths" are not created equal. Some are based on reason and some or not. My belief that the Earth is round could be demonstrated several dozen ways; your belief in a "creative god" can't be objectively demonstrated it all. There is a difference.