Let me start off by saying that you're lucky I'm even responding to this, because I literally have to scroll a million times just to get your quotes because of your incessantly annoying choice to individually post each and every response you had to me, quite literally giving me a headache.
That said, here we go:
I believe you mean the same thing TBH, correct me if I'm wrong
You're wrong.
because you dismiss them as the same.
That doesn't mean they're the same. Empty claims have no value ever. Unproven claims currently have no value. 5000 years ago, when the entire human race thought the world was flat, one man claiming the world was round was an unproven claim. Back then, I'd have dismissed it the same, however, obviously he's correct. He had simply not proven it. You have a nasty habit of making assumptions. You should stop that. You might actually be correct once in a while otherwise.
If I was wrong you wouldn't be using the term "unproven" instead you would be considering it as part of evidence to be evaluated and possibly learn from it.
That literally makes no sense at all. An unproven claim is not evidence... wtf are you on about? If you had any verifiable, non-speculative evidence at all for your claims, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Because, to whom do you mean unproven?
To anyone whom has not empirically perceived proof.
your assumption is that spirituality is unproven and therefore you don't accept it as evidence before you even give anything a try
For starters, spirituality being unproven isn't an assumption. It's a fact. Secondly, accept spirituality as evidence? So you want me to accept a claim as evidence itself? And you say you're not delusional? Dude, are you alright? Do you need some help? Or are you just trolling here?
to you they are empty claims otherwise you would put some value to it.
A claim is not evidence. Spirituality has no demonstrable evidence to support it, therefore it is an unproven claim. If you want to contest the words I'm using, then break out a dictionary and prove them incorrect.
Do you not see the circular argument?
Nope.
what is the difference you wish to distinguish between empty and unproven?
See quote #2 in this post
this is why I was careful to use cross referencing when referring to spiritual experiences because "unproven" is a subjective claim, that is your perception only and at what point are you willing to learn from someone who has experienced something you have yet to?
If you expect me to take someone's word for it when they tell me invisible pink unicorns exist, then you're not only delusional, but an utter idiot as well.
You seem to skip all my points about involvement, as to basically say you don't give a shyt.
No, I simply prove them invalid, and you proceed to ignore the proof. That's not my fault. Talking to you is like talking to a child who believes in Santa Clause. "Seeing isn't believing. Believing is seeing." And then you show him a globe and utterly prove that the north poll is uninhabitable, and he's all like "magicks!" You really need to take a class on reality.
Is that the best you got?
You're saying I need to do more than prove your argument fallacious in order to defeat it? Well now I guess you also need a class on debate.
That you are dismissing without any real reasons because evidence consists of testimonies
Testimonies are not evidence. If they were, argumentum ad populum wouldn't be a logical fallacy. It would in fact be a valid argument. A million trillion zillion people could claim that hands and feet don't exist, and yet they would all still be wrong. You don't seem to grasp this concept. You don't seem to grasp what evidence and proof is at all. It leads me to question your presence here on a debate website.
which is fist hand encounters so there is no reason for you to treat it like it doesn't exist, skeptical is fine but evidence exists. To you, spirituality is as good as empty claims which you denied. Otherwise you would admit there is in fact evidence.
Present this evidence and I'll admit it. Keep insisting that a claim is evidence and I'll keep calling you an idiot.
Lol, you mean you are not willing to look at facts, spiritual based facts from legit sources.
What facts? Show me these facts, and explain why these sources are "legit."
Did you pay attention to anything I wrote?
I did indeed. I don't respond to things I haven't read.
So in other words you want to play it your way, you don't want to perceive spirituality as it is and learn new things.
If spirituality were proven to exist, I'd love to learn about it. However, I don't believe in Santa Clause anymore dude. I'm a grown up now. Grown ups usually require proof of things existing in order to believe they do. If Santa Clause wants to come shake my hand, I'll believe he exists.
