|
|
|
Terryt88
Skeptic Friend
USA
120 Posts |
 Posted - 12/02/2002 : 13:26:38
|
Ok, so I was looking for a good definition of the Burden of Proof Fallacy to post in another thread and I came upon this link. This man believes that it becomes the responsibility of the Skeptic to provide evidence in the burden of proof fallacy.
He uses a lot of latin, and I must say that latin is greek to me. (bad pun) 
What do you all think?
http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth11.html
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
 Posted - 12/02/2002 : 13:33:46 [Permalink]
|
The person who makes a claim is the one who has to support it. It's not so much skepticism as it is basic honesty.
In the article you posted the author claims that Atheists have an UNbelief (7-Up?) instead of just lacking a belief.
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
| Edited by - Slater on 12/02/2002 13:36:38 |
 |
|
|
Terryt88
Skeptic Friend
USA
120 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 13:49:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A later version of this is to counter the claim, one, that there are certain basic propositions which do not include 'God exists' and, two, that other such propositions as 'God exists' must be justified by grounding them in basic beliefs. The theist can accept this model of justification and blandly add that 'God exists' is one of his basic propositions. Why not?
So is he saying, "god exists because I say so"?
quote:
My own first question envisages a meatier interpretation than that. I am asking whether the skeptic is justified in calling into question the truth of 'God exists.' Why not put the burden on him? Why not insist that he is attempting to convict of irrationality generations of human beings, rational animals like himself, whole cultures for whom belief in the divine and worship are part of what it is to be a human being? Were all those millions, that silent majority, wrong? Surely to think something against the grain of the whole tradition of human experience is not to be done lightly. It is, need one say it, presumptuous to pit against that past one's own version of the modern mind. This suggests that the present generation is in agreement on things incompatible with belief in God. Or that all informed people now alive, etc. etc. Meaning, I suppose, that all present day skeptics are skeptics.
This one I had to read a few times over (and over) again. And please correct me if I am wrong, it sounds like he uses the fact that since millions of people are theist, that theism in general is justified.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 13:58:05 [Permalink]
|
He is saying that he has more votes for god existing therefore one does exist. Not a very bright fellow. OK, I will go out on a limb and call him an idiot.
It really bugs me that many believers figure they can say anything they want and expect skeptics to do their work for them then turn around and get pissed off if that's turned around on them. I am constantly amazed at the number of educated people that feel that this is perfectly OK. It's a wonder we ever got past the dark ages. Oh yeah, it was by the effort of skeptics.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:06:41 [Permalink]
|
Go ahead. Call him an idot. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:08:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by @tomic
OK, I will go out on a limb and call him an idot.
Is that a new product from Apple?
  |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:13:15 [Permalink]
|
From the link:
quote:
Were all those millions, that silent majority, wrong?
The obviousness of this mistake in thinking is such that I can't believe people still proffer it.
A great many people, very likely a majority of people in the world, believed that the earth was flat. This did not make it so.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:19:43 [Permalink]
|
| Define god(s) then we can take those characteristics and see whether or not they can be shown to be false. Generally, the definitions of god(s) are so vague that no one could possibly rely on them for anything anyway. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:45:06 [Permalink]
|
Interestingly enough this is the George W Bush attitude towards Iraq regarding possible weapons of mass destruction. He has taken the position that Iraq has them and it's up to everyone to prove they don't. This is, of course, impossible which means that if we are going to war no matter what. It's sad that so many will die because the President can't understand basic concepts. It's sad that so few stand up to him and try to offer a more logical way at going about this. Anyway...just an example of where such poor thinking methods can lead.
@tomic
|
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
a65phalcon
New Member
USA
44 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:52:07 [Permalink]
|
| It seems to me that most if you people just want to "toot" your own horn. I don't really agree with the fact that more votes=justification. But seriously, when an individual posts to the board with anything tangible about God and his existence it is automatically thrown to the wayside. You guys seem to let out a huge sigh of disgust because another damn Christian posted something stupid. I think most of you would rather listen to yourselves bitch and moan. It is pretty stupid. The very least you could do is try and have an open and analytical mind or approach. Otherwise you are exactly what you hate, you become those hard-nosed ignorant Christians. |
|
|
|
a65phalcon
New Member
USA
44 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 14:53:25 [Permalink]
|
| Can anyone say "Groupthink"? |
|
|
|
LordofEntropy
Skeptic Friend
USA
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 15:00:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by a65phalcon
It seems to me that most if you people just want to "toot" your own horn. I don't really agree with the fact that more votes=justification. But seriously, when an individual posts to the board with anything tangible about God and his existence it is automatically thrown to the wayside.
Tangible about God? Where is this "tangible" thing you refer to? All I have ever seen is claims like:
"God exists cause the bible says he does."
"You just have to believe."
"I feel his presence everyday."
"Well since there is such a large following, he has to exist, all those people wouldn't say so if it wasn't true."
|
Entropy just isn't what it used to be.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 15:13:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But seriously, when an individual posts to the board with anything tangible about God and his existence it is automatically thrown to the wayside.
Pretty funny stuff. You give yourself too much credit. The problem is that no one has ever in all of human history produced anything even remotely tangible regarding any sort of god. There is another problem at work here. Christians and believers in general have a very poor conception of what is good evidence or evidence at all. Sorry you seem to think that requiring evidence amounts to bitching and moaning but that's how it is with the road to the truth. You need to be prepared to back up your claim. If not you had better believe we will cast your 2,000 year old belief system into the garbage. I can understand why you hate our little way at arriving at validity because it puts everything you know and believe in peril. No amount of name calling changes the fact that your position made no sense whatsoever. You should re-read your post and look at all the value statements you threw in there including the word hate. I take it that name calling is one of your methods for arriving at the truth? If so..good luck.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2002 : 15:25:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by a65phalcon
The very least you could do is try and have an open and analytical mind or approach.
Good idea. - Suggest to us the protocols of analysis and criteria of acceptance to be employed.
- Explain to us the methodological approach that preferentialy verifies/validates your God(s).
- Identify the valid data sources to be considered.
- Suggest the repeatable tests to be performed.
- Tell us the conditions under which your God-construct is falsifiable.
Or, conversely, stop pretending that your Christology is anything more than silly, gospel-based placebo effect. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
| Edited by - ConsequentAtheist on 12/02/2002 15:29:28 |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
