I suppose that one could say from
an a priori
point no given
statement is more logical than another.
It seems rational to inform our logic through experience.
There is no experience for the existence of a God.
We must choose between some arbitrary
world whose rules we do not full understand
and some arbitrary world whoose rules we do not fully understand which contains a God (an object that
can behave contrary to all of the accumulated
evidence that we have about how things can behave),
furthermore a God that has, as yet, no observational
Seeking the lest ad hoc explanation
indicates that we should choose the Godless world.
This seems logical to me.
Why would one search for a deity through logic
when logic has been constructed to help us
think clearly about human propositions?
Meaning is what you make of it.