Why are atheists so intent on scorning "believers"?

by Chariklo 553 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Christ Alone

  Niether of those is a fallacy.

  Oh dear. A fallacy is broken logic. There is no logic in "go buy a book and learn something". That is implying that the person arguing does not have sufficient knowledge. It is leaving the argument unspecific. It's merely a veiled attack on the person's intelligence as if they have never read a science book. So yes, it is a fallacy.

  Many people familiarize themselves with only a few logical fallacies, and do not know that there are many many others. Here are some:

  Genetic Fallacy
  ~The attempt to invalidate a position or belief, merely by showing how the position or belief originated.
  Example :"Christianity arose because people feared reality, because people were scared of death. Therefore Christianity is false."
  
  Ad Hominem Fallacy
  ~An argument that attempts to counter another's claims or conclusions by attacking the person, rather than addressing the argument itself.
  Example :"You're an Idiot, only gullible, ignorant fools believe in God."
  
  Argument from Personal Incredulity
  ~An argument thats attempts to disprove or negate a position because the individual either does not understand and/or explain and/or imagine it.
  Example : "God seems so illogical to me, he can't possibly exist."
  
  Appeal to Ridicule
  ~A fallacy where ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an argument.
  Example :"You can claim that God exists all you want, the theistic position is still laughable and illogical."
  
  The Masked Man Fallacy (Illicit Substitution of Identities)
  ~A fallacy where an assumption is made that because something is known under one perspective, that it must also be known under a different perspective.
  Example :"Thousands of years ago people believed lightning, rain and droughts were caused by a/the God(s). This has been disproved by science. Others believe in fairies and this is untrue. Therefore God played no role in the creation of the Universe."
  
  Appeal to Pity
  ~The receiver is urged to accept arguments based off an appeal to emotions or sympathy."
  Example :"How could you honestly believe in God when there are starving children in Africa?"
  
  Guilt by Association
  ~Rejecting someone's argument because of the person's friends, religion, topic standing etc.
  Example :"Why should I believe anything you say? You're a Christian after all! Religion has been responsible for horrible atrocities"
• 

  elderelite

  well, lets not get crazy charlie. If i cant be sarcastic i dont wanna be here
• 

  Christ Alone

  Here is another one:

  Inferential Fallacy
  ~believing that if proposition A is true that proposition B cannot be true because they are mutually exclusive when they are not
  Example: Light and dark cannot exist in the same room (untrue. It can if the light is in the room and the dark is in the box that is in the room)
  Example: If there is suferring a loving God could not allow that to happen
• 

  Chariklo

  Hey, your sarcasm is totally different, ElderE
• 

  Christ Alone

  Its all ego. Really. ITs all peoples attempt to show how superior THEIR belief system is, be it God or No God, may be a god or definatly maybe not a god possibly.

  To some maybe. But not true of many. It is an important question philosophically of who we are and where we are going. It's an important issue to atheists and theists. JWs rarely think in philosophical terms, so I'll cut you a break EE. Maybe when you get out and don't have to spend all that time doing fake elder stuff, you can join in the discussion without Thor.

  To many, this discussion really matters and is at the heart of who we are. That is one reason why Dawkins is intensly interested in it. It's the reason why many believers are interested too. It's an issue that effects us all. The discussion has great relevance and import to our society.
• 

  EntirelyPossible

  A fallacy is broken logic. There is no logic in "go buy a book and learn something". That is implying that the person arguing does not have sufficient knowledge. It is leaving the argument unspecific. It's merely a veiled attack on the person's intelligence as if they have never read a science book. So yes, it is a fallacy.

  If you are saying something wrong about science, suggesting you go read up on it is not a logical fallacy. It's a suggestion that you improve your base of knowledge. The person receiving the suggestion might not like it, but that does not make it a logical fallcy.

  Posting links to logical fallacies and using examples that make atheists looks bad (on purpose) doesn't strengthen your argument, it just shows your bias. And it does not make your assertion correct.
• 

  mrsjones5

  The sarcasm is thick with this one.

  Sometimes the kiddies just can't stop fighting over the toys EE.
• 

  still thinking

  Actually EE, I'm finding the whole thing kinda funny. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. The question is why are atheists so intent on scorning 'believers'.

  I don't think they are. I think non atheists misunderstand a hell of a lot of what atheists say and see what they think we say. Hell, they don't even understand the definition of an atheist because the dictionary even seems to have it wrong. As an atheist I am not refusing to see the truth. I wonder who wrote that definition? I doubt it was an atheist.
• 

  Christ Alone

  If you are saying something wrong about science, suggesting you go read up on it is not a logical fallacy

  Absolutely correct. However, when nothing wrong is stated about science but the argument is "Just go read some anthropology or something", that is a fallacy. Interestingly I was not even commenting about science when this was brought up. I was stating that both theist and atheist use logical fallacies. I gave a specific example from a textbook. Instead of discussing the claim, it was brought up, "Well that book was from 1996. It's not in use anymore." Nothing about the comments it made. And the line of thinking degraded into "You know nothing about science."

  It was bizarre. And I don't think hades was even reading my posts closely. He thought I was arguing in favor of the rapture and miracles. All I was asking was IF those things WERE true, would that be enough evidence? If not, what sort of evidence would it take to believe in God. That was it. What would be enough evidence. Atheists love to say, there is no evidence of God. So I was asking, Well what evidence would be enough for you?
• 

  elderelite

  lol its hysterical jonsey!!!! to accuse me of not being philosophical is like accusing a cow of not being bovine.... kids will be kids i suppose. its also hysterical he missed where is said the discussion is great its the kiddie sand throwing. But people prove what and who they are every day. No need for me to be surprised.