Recent experience I thought I would share
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-04-2012, 10:23 AM
Recent experience I thought I would share
Recently, a fb friend posted a comment to the effect that "non-believers can explain where human rights and liberties come from besides God."
Never one to let a challenge go and a strong believer in individual liberties, I answered. My answer, if I do say so, was reasonable, relied on recognized sources outside of the atheist community (and in) and of course required no recourse to religion or god to justify it. As expected, the replies came pouring in.
Every old, worn out, red-herring was thrown into the mix. What started as a question regarding the sources of liberty became an argument over morality, ethics, statism, Hitler, Stalin, et al. Everything but the core topic. When confronted several times by my original answer, (In case you were wondering, rights/liberties arise out of the fact of our existence/sentience and our essential need to survive.) the topic would change and the goal post would be moved. No problem, was my response, and I would confront their assertions and bring the topic back. Finally, and the reason why I post this, the original poster of the thread made a comment that was the ultimate face-palm movement. Having run out of any conceiveable response to my arguments, he simply posted the following:
"There is a big problem with arguing from "reason" and it is the same as arguing from "morality." They both are relative terms. Whose morality and whose reason? I am sure you see your comments as reason based. I see my comments ...as fully reason based as well. Yet we do not agree. Why? Because each person's reasoning has been developed from their own experiences and study and so reason is very titled toward what we have encountered as well as how deep we have considered what we have encountered. At least that is the way I reason reason. Perhaps you reason reason differently, which would of course make my point. :-)".
So, I understand that the theist is guilty of magical thinking, but now I learn that reason is entirely subjective and ergo facts are not facts. who'da thunk it!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes vtgadfly's post
06-04-2012, 10:43 AM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
Behold the strawman, a common arsenal used in arguments like this. To counter this foe, you have to summon another strawman of equal or better strength, or cast Flame Storm to destroy the strawman.

I'm not really good in countering mental gymnastics like this, but here's a suggestion. Keep trying to point out what his/her statement has got to do with the topic. Let them explain. They propose something, they better explain the heck out of it.

Welcome to science. You're gonna like it here - Phil Plait

Have you ever tried taking a comfort blanket away from a small child? - DLJ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2012, 01:00 PM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
(06-04-2012 10:43 AM)robotworld Wrote:  Behold the strawman, a common arsenal used in arguments like this. To counter this foe, you have to summon another strawman of equal or better strength, or cast Flame Storm to destroy the strawman.

I'm not really good in countering mental gymnastics like this, but here's a suggestion. Keep trying to point out what his/her statement has got to do with the topic. Let them explain. They propose something, they better explain the heck out of it.
Mental gymnastics is right. During this person's short diatribe about "atheist like Hitler" I interjected that Hitler was not an atheist. The person challenged that assertion and asked me to prove it. (laying aside the fact that the person making the original assertion has the burden of proof) I noted Hitler's Catholic upbringing and his constant references in speeches and writing to God, Divine Providence, etc. The reply I got was "well saying you are catholic doesn't make you one." I then replied that I didn't say he was a catholic, only that he believed in a god and erog was a theist. This sent him for a loop.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2012, 08:27 PM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
Speaking of Hitler...
http://popeorhitler.com/

This website should be a lot of fun, and help you against him Tongue

Welcome to science. You're gonna like it here - Phil Plait

Have you ever tried taking a comfort blanket away from a small child? - DLJ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2012, 04:10 PM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
Idea?
Instead of these detailed arguments just say that they have no more reason to believe in the christian god as it is to believe in the greek gods, the roman gods and so on.
I know this sounds extremely simple, but I know a little about marketing. You can kill a brand by associating it with a high negative. Politicians attempt this all the time.
So assume Christianity with the same mindset as Helenism and just keep saying it. I'm using the term Christian Mythology constantly now. It gets quite a reaction sometimes. If we combine the terms continuously we link the two.

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thomas's post
07-04-2012, 06:02 PM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionar..._religions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/dis...id=3118520

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2012, 10:51 AM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
And the discussion continues. I won't bore you with the normal tripe that he keeps throwing out there (which I think he honestly believes), but the latest and funnies is this gem. In a discussion of liberty and "free will" he asserts that "How is it that all these things happen that are contrary to the laws of God if there is no free will?" I nearly wet myself on this one. So I told him to just remove the middle of his sentence to get his answer. To wit, "all these things happen because there is free will. God need not grant free will nor issue a law because he doesn't exist. Your question assumes both a God and a law before you get to your question. My answer does not make that assumption and I arrive at my answer without issue."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2012, 11:13 AM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
I liked the part about people reasoning reason different because different reasons reason reason differently, that's reasonable Tongue

that's not mental gymnastics, is just semantic juggling, there's one reason, if they reason in a different way they're not reasoning they're just vomiting fallacies ¬¬

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2012, 07:57 AM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
(10-04-2012 11:13 AM)nach_in Wrote:  I liked the part about people reasoning reason different because different reasons reason reason differently, that's reasonable Tongue

that's not mental gymnastics, is just semantic juggling, there's one reason, if they reason in a different way they're not reasoning they're just vomiting fallacies ¬¬
What I like most about this assertion on his part is, the thread began with the observation that he can't see how atheist think that human rights can come from anywhere but God, and then asserts that his reason and reality is different from my reason and reality and therefore makes it impossible for us to reason the same. Ergo, according to him, his first assertion was an admission of his inability to reason like an atheist, but an atheist carries the responsibility to reason like him in order to prove our assertion, which he admits is an impossibility.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2012, 12:21 PM
RE: Recent experience I thought I would share
(11-04-2012 07:57 AM)vtgadfly Wrote:  
(10-04-2012 11:13 AM)nach_in Wrote:  I liked the part about people reasoning reason different because different reasons reason reason differently, that's reasonable Tongue

that's not mental gymnastics, is just semantic juggling, there's one reason, if they reason in a different way they're not reasoning they're just vomiting fallacies ¬¬
What I like most about this assertion on his part is, the thread began with the observation that he can't see how atheist think that human rights can come from anywhere but God, and then asserts that his reason and reality is different from my reason and reality and therefore makes it impossible for us to reason the same. Ergo, according to him, his first assertion was an admission of his inability to reason like an atheist, but an atheist carries the responsibility to reason like him in order to prove our assertion, which he admits is an impossibility.
of course he did, theist tend to make their "reasoning" air tight so nobody can argue them, but that's why they always fall on circular arguments Hobo

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: