IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 22nd November 2022, 06:22 PM   #1
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Robin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 13,991
You can reject a refutation of a claim without believing the claim itsellf

I don't know why this even needs to be said, but apparently it does.

For example, on Twitter Sam Harris offered an argument as to why there is no afterlife. I pointed out that his argument worked for neither the Christian nor the Muslim conceptions of an afterlife. Someone responded and said the burden was on me to prove there is an afterlife. I said I don't believe there is an afterlife, to which he responded "So now you are backtracking".

It happens again and again. If I say that the Bible does not imply that pi is equal to 3 then I am assumed to be a Bible inerrantist.

If I say that time paradoxes do not prove that time travel is impossible people immediately that I am saying that time travel is possible. If I say.there is a perfectly good definition of God I am assumed to believe in God.

This attitude implied that if someone says "We know the Earth is spherical because the Bible tells us so" and I point out that this is not a good argument then this means I must be a flat earther.

No of course it doesn't. But why is it so difficult for people to understand this?
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2022, 06:36 PM   #2
Apathia
Philosopher
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,522
People are quick to pigeonhole when they have either-or else narratives.

And wasn't there some a few years ago about the "Rule of So?"
"So, you believe ..."
"So, you're saying ..."

There are ca couple of threads right now where people who disagree with the OP's argument, are slotted into being crypto believers.

And this happens in the politics section all the time.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2022, 06:36 PM   #3
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 14,308
Well, …

Just because somebody may give you their opinion about your postings, then it is quite possible for that somebody to have the wrong opinion about your postings.
__________________
On 29JUL2022, 'Gaetan' said: "We all know here that the moderators are for the use of firearms and they don't mind if some people recieve a bullet in their head."

On 15FEB2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2022, 07:36 PM   #4
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,636
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
I don't know why this even needs to be said, but apparently it does.

For example, on Twitter Sam Harris offered an argument as to why there is no afterlife. I pointed out that his argument worked for neither the Christian nor the Muslim conceptions of an afterlife. Someone responded and said the burden was on me to prove there is an afterlife. I said I don't believe there is an afterlife, to which he responded "So now you are backtracking".

It happens again and again. If I say that the Bible does not imply that pi is equal to 3 then I am assumed to be a Bible inerrantist.

If I say that time paradoxes do not prove that time travel is impossible people immediately that I am saying that time travel is possible. If I say.there is a perfectly good definition of God I am assumed to believe in God.

This attitude implied that if someone says "We know the Earth is spherical because the Bible tells us so" and I point out that this is not a good argument then this means I must be a flat earther. No of course it doesn't.
What you're describing here sounds like a "False Dilemma" fallacy.

Originally Posted by Robin View Post
But why is it so difficult for people to understand this?
Its no more complicated than the fact they are stupid!
.
.
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2022, 07:50 PM   #5
8enotto
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Mexico
Posts: 2,662
It seems to also be used as a tool to win a disagreement when desperate.
Discount the person doing it?
8enotto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2022, 07:56 PM   #6
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 79,042
I see this all the time in R&P. Lifelong atheists argue against religion, but the arguments they are making are bad arguments. I do not have to believe in the religion in order to point this out.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd November 2022, 01:00 AM   #7
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 18,985
Arguments for an afterlife are always self-contradictory.
__________________
"The only true paradise is paradise lost"
Marcel Proust
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd November 2022, 08:27 AM   #8
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 33,253
I think this was a favorite issue of the late poster here, Marplots. He often got cussed as a contrarian (and he could be annoying at times anyway) because he refused to accept a bad argument even for a good cause.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd November 2022, 08:49 AM   #9
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,844
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
No of course it doesn't. But why is it so difficult for people to understand this?
If it doesn't fit into a tweet, it's too complex for Twitter.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd November 2022, 02:51 PM   #10
GDon
Graduate Poster
 
GDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,378
In a similar vein, and to paraphrase CS Lewis: Nothing worse than trying to defend weak arguments in defence of your worldview. Far more honest to point out the weakness of such arguments even if they support overall conclusions you agree with.

But of course, as the OP states, when you point out bad arguments on your own side, you get called a member of the other side. Sometimes people continually using bad arguments do more harm against their own side than anything the other side can do.

Edited by jimbob:  removed rule 12 violation

Last edited by jimbob; 24th November 2022 at 12:56 AM.
GDon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:19 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.