|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:38 PM |
Skeptics: - Logic - Reason
Theists: - Faith
I wonder which to choose... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Ryan6069
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Jul 2009 |
| Total Posts: 219 |
|
| |
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:42 PM |
| There's rationale for theists but you hate your church so you're not gonna do much to look for any |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:48 PM |
>"There's rationale for theists" If wishful thinking counts as "rationale", then okay.
>"you hate your church so you're not gonna do much to look for any" That was a blatant ad hominem. -_- |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
BlastB00M
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Nov 2011 |
| Total Posts: 25555 |
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:50 PM |
| Judging from the avatar, I'd say this is heartstrings. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:50 PM |
Hellao
I have come to vix your vashing machine |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:51 PM |
"Judging from the avatar, I'd say this is heartstrings." This is just the default female avatar... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:52 PM |
Dude you've already expressed your hatred for your church I'm just being real
I wouldn't call it a fallacy since I have grounds |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
12prind
|
  |
| Joined: 02 May 2012 |
| Total Posts: 4153 |
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:54 PM |
"There's rationale for theists but you hate your church so you're not gonna do much to look for any"
ya no there isn't.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:55 PM |
"I wouldn't call it a fallacy since I have grounds"
You clearly misunderstand what the ad hominem fallacy is. If the catholic priest who touched those little boys came up to me and posed an argument to why he thinks children should attend church, and I said, "You're just saying that because you're a paedo." I am committing the ad hominem fallacy.
If you personally attack someone, even if it's a fact, as a basis to dismiss their arguments, THAT is what the ad hominem fallacy is.
"Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone's case without actually having to engage with it." - https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 09:58 PM |
Lol really there's not much difference
Skeptics still have to have faith in order to believe in things that are merely inferential
And theists use reason and logic in every day life outside of religion Even with religion, the Bible says to test the scriptures in practice in Thessalonians
There's not much contrast between them, especially since not every skeptic is going to be uniform with each other, same with theists
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 10:00 PM |
"Skeptics still have to have faith in order to believe in things that are merely inferential" Don't just make ridiculous claims and then not provide your reasoning. You're claiming that circular squares exist. If a skeptic has faith, they are, by definition, not a skeptic.
"And theists use reason and logic in every day life outside of religion" They lie and make logical fallacies and convince themselves that they're being logical.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 10:07 PM |
>You're claiming that circular squares exist. Lol how
>If a skeptic has faith, then they are by definition, not a skeptic. A skeptic is one who questions or doubts accepted opinions. Therefore they could not only be skeptic of theism, but accepted secular values. Therefore they're not a uniform group but merely it's an umbrella term for people who deny accepted ideas. You could even deny rational claims and be a skeptic.
>They lie and make logical fallacies and convince themselves that they're being logical. "Don't just make ridiculuous claims and then not provide your reasoning" Please elaborate |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 10:13 PM |
>"Lol how" You ridicule the argument and ask for an explanation, even though the explanation not only follows but you also quote it?
>"A skeptic is one who questions or doubts accepted opinions. Therefore they could not only be skeptic of theism, but accepted secular values. Therefore they're not a uniform group but merely it's an umbrella term for people who deny accepted ideas. You could even deny rational claims and be a skeptic."
skeptic - a person inclined to question or doubt a̲l̲l accepted opinions. faith - c̲o̲m̲p̲l̲e̲t̲e trust or confidence in someone or something.
You can't have a square circle.
"Please elaborate" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUDFcM_A-88
How many lies does this creationist say in the debate? In fact, find me a SINGLE debate in which a creationist does not lie.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
OTRumble
|
  |
| Joined: 12 Jul 2013 |
| Total Posts: 167 |
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 10:33 PM |
@BlackCrisisDrone
Hi how's it going. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 09 Sep 2013 10:35 PM |
>You ridicule the argument and ask for an explanation, even though the explanation not only follows but you also quote it?
You said I was claiming circular squares exist, which I didn't nor do I believe that they do. I was asking for an explanation to where you got the notion I believe in circle-squares.
>skeptic - a person inclined to question or doubt a̲l̲l accepted opinions. Ergo they would most likely doubt many of things you believe in.
>How many lies does this creationist say in the debate? In fact, find me a SINGLE debate in which a creationist does not lie.
Sorry I couldn't back sooner, I had fallen off my chair and was laughing for a while. Do you really expect me to watch a 3 hour video? I will say though I skimmed and will give the benefit of the doubt that there were fallacies and at the most ''lies'' in what he was saying.
As long as we're pointing out fallacies, let's point out the big fat ad-hominem and generalization you have there. So since someone is a creationist, they automatically ignore logic and reason indiscriminately? What about the many creationists who take up professions in law, science, and politics where they have to think and use logic quite frequently? Or is your definition of logic different than what I'm thinking of? The biggest joke I've heard tonight though was someone actually trying to tell me to find them a debate where a creationist does not lie. I would hope people would have the common sense to know that there are probably millions of instances where this has occurred and they wouldn't need to question otherwise. But I guess that would be a faith driven thing, hmm? Well I suppose as someone who is so fervorous when it comes to the scientific method as you appear to be Weasel you'd test that notion for yourself rather than have someone else try to show you evidence. Otherwise it sounds a bit indoctrinating. Maybe you should look into that confirmation bias you have there. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|