Atheism (2)

[createdtoworship]

It's called logic. Look it up.

I am just curious,

how do you know it's a bad argument, if you have never seen a good one to compare it to?

logic is an ad hominem, not relating to the topic.

 

[Gadarene]

true, might as well convert everyone. you know?

Didn't think I'd have to point this one out.

Erm...Christians have blogs too, y'know.

 

[Gadarene]

I am just curious,

how do you know it's a bad argument, if you have never seen a good one to compare it to?

Already answered, champ. Logic. We know which forms of argument work, and which don't (logic fallacies), we know how to test and question premises if they don't hold up.

logic is an ad hominem, not relating to the topic.

Given that you still don't know what an ad hominem is, it most certainly is relevant to the topic in many more ways than you might think....

 

[Going Merry]

I think its illogical for a atheist to believe in god...
I think its illogical for a theist to not believe in god...

what exactly is logic again >_>

 

[BuffMonkey5]

I am just curious,

how do you know it's a bad argument, if you have never seen a good one to compare it to?

logic is an ad hominem, not relating to the topic.

Logicians generally don't formally define arguments as either "good" or "bad". They use the terms "valid," "invalid," and "sound."

If we are talking about valid arguments as "good" arguments, rules of inference and truth tables are your friend in determining what a good argument is.

For soundness, all you need to do is make sure all of the premises are true and the argument is valid. (soundness is pretty much as good as it gets).

If you're unsure about a premise's truth value, you need some sort of method to determine its truth value (authority, science, a priori method to name a few). If you are one to believe that you can never determine a premise's truth value, I recommend looking up "tautologies".

One of my favorite reads on this topic is Charles Peirce's essay "The Fixation of Belief." It's really fast and really good.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Very odd indeed.

She gives very vague and wordy (yet empty) explanations.

Here's the conversion moment, in all it's glory. Have fun wading through it



Weak...

I stand by my original guess that she was just some chick with a blog, rather than a rationally thinking person.

First off, even if she disagreed with the evolutionary explanation behind morality, or even better, even if she was CORRECT in rejecting the evolutionary explanation for morality, that provides absolutely no evidence for God. All that would prove is that there's some other explanation out there, and God is simply an idea on where it may have come from.

She's doing a classic "I don't know, so God must have done it!" God of the Gaps fallacy.... it is pretty weak.

I'm kinda let down actually, I was hoping for some kind of compelling argument.

 

[Dave Ellis]

the fact that she had a blog solidifies that she was originally an athiest, and not a hidden catholic.

When did I dispute the fact she was an Atheist who converted to Catholicism?

 

[Dave Ellis]

how can you recognize a bad argument if you don't have any good arguments to contrast with?

Because if you're presented with a pile of arguments filled with logical fallacies, that makes them all bad arguments.

You don't need a single good argument on that specific topic to differentiate a logically sound argument from a logically flawed one.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I am just curious,

how do you know it's a bad argument, if you have never seen a good one to compare it to?

logic is an ad hominem, not relating to the topic.

We have seen good arguments, just none on that particular topic.

 

[KCfromNC]

Prominent atheist blogger converts to Catholicism – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

Why I Left The Ministry And Became An Atheist, by G. Vincent Runyon

 

[createdtoworship]

Why I Left The Ministry And Became An Atheist, by G. Vincent Runyon

List of former atheists and agnostics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

I thank GOD may have allowed atheism to come about. So that in the end HE would have a strong stimulus to exercise HIS wrath.

 

[createdtoworship]

Because if you're presented with a pile of arguments filled with logical fallacies, that makes them all bad arguments.

You don't need a single good argument on that specific topic to differentiate a logically sound argument from a logically flawed one.

quote mine! The context was the catholic conversion from athiesm. No fallacies there! In fact we know very little for why She converted.

 

[createdtoworship]

Because if you're presented with a pile of arguments filled with logical fallacies, that makes them all bad arguments.

You don't need a single good argument on that specific topic to differentiate a logically sound argument from a logically flawed one.

no logical fallacies in her conversion from athiesm. Straw man!

 

[createdtoworship]

We have seen good arguments, just none on that particular topic.

ad hominen! You didn't read the context of our posts, just jumped in!

 

[Gadarene]

ad hominen! You didn't read the context of our posts, just jumped in!

Again, not an ad hom.

Really, give it up. You have no clue how to identify fallacies.

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

Again, not an ad hom.

Really, give it up. You have no clue how to identify fallacies.

Se i call a f

 

[Gadarene]

Se i call a f

Man, I remember the last time I called an f.

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

Man, I remember the last time I called an f.

Everything forwards is also backwards.Yeah them freaking f's can get the best out of all of us. Lol

 

[ToddNotTodd]

ad hominen! You didn't read the context of our posts, just jumped in!

It seems to me that if you're insisting on posting in a Philosophy forum, you should have some basic understanding of Philosophy. You don't even need to buy a book on the subject. There's plenty of websites out there that can give you a list of logical fallacies, with examples.