The Watchmaker’s Argument is perhaps one of the most fundamentally flawed arguments for intelligent design I have ever heard. In other words, you walk along a beach and see a watch, and immediately recognize it as having been designed, I guess due to its complexity and appearance of design.
Archive for the ‘Logic & Critical Thinking’ Category
Often, when arguing against fundamentalists of all stripes (whether religious, anti-abortion, anti-gay-marriage, etc.), this trope comes up eventually. “Yeah, well, you’re just as fundamentalist as I am! You’re just in the other extreme!” And I call B.S. Here’s why (explanation after the jump):
Below is the entirety of the text of the decision by Judge Ronald R. Lagueux in the case of Jessica Ahlquist v. City of Cranston, in regards to the unconstitutional school prayer banner that was up at Cranston High School West. While others have selected the best parts of the text of the decision, I present it here untouched, except for formatting purposes. For the purpose of absolutely transparency, the original can be found at the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island website.
This list was inspired in part by a sort-of FAQ I wrote (Facebook login required) for new members just joining the “Support the Removal of the Cranston High School West Prayer Banner” Facebook group of which I am a member. It had come to my attention that many new members of the page were arguing against straw-men or were just plain wrong about certain things. A lot of people who form opinions on this case or on Jessica Ahlquist herself seem to not have read the judge’s decision in this matter (PDF file) and, as a result, are largely ignorant of the facts involved. Here is my grand experiment: a list of the common arguments for the prayer banner, or against Jessica Ahlquist and her position, as well as my responses.
One trend of which I’m seeing more and more lately is the desperate attempt by some fundamentalists out there to redefine the word “bigotry”. Quite a few times lately I’ve seen fundamentalists try to claim that because one is intolerant of bigotry, that means one is a bigot oneself … which is preposterous for many reasons.
Maybe it’s just because I have never had this explained to me properly, but where is the line drawn between what can and what cannot be eaten by vegans, and what is the reasoning behind the placement of said line?
This time, he’s got an interesting article proposing a “rational” argument for the existence of God. Of course, he fails to mention whether it’s his Jewish God, the Christian God, Muslim God, or maybe some amalgamation of the three, often referred to as the “Abrahamic” God.
However, as usual, Rabbi Jacobs’ writing is filled with arguments from ignorance, straw-men arguments, fallacious arguments from authority, and many other logical fallacies. Let’s begin, shall we?
I came across this clip of February 13th’s episode of The Atheist Experience and decided to share it with you.
Not only that, but I decided to transcribe it. One of the commenters on the video page wanted a transcription of Matt’s response, to be translated by himself and shared with others. Since I am in full support of this cause, I decided to take it upon myself to transcribe certain parts by hand.
If you got philosophical problems, I feel bad for ya, son. I got 99 problems, but evil ain’t one!
It all began when a fellow atheist, nicknamed The Thinking Atheist (a redundancy if I ever heard one) released a revamped version of his video, The Story of Suzie, a tale of a Christian woman who prays to God, hasn’t yet realized it’s all futile, thanks God that natural disasters didn’t claim more victims than they already had, and thinks that everything that happens is according to God’s plan. Of course, The Christian Post took offense to TTA’s portrayal of Suzie and people like her.
Welcome to the third installment in what is sure to be a lengthy response to the claims and arguments made in the popular Christian iPhone app for debaters and apologists, called Fast Facts.
In the first two parts, as well as this one, I will be tackling the section of the app under the “Challenges and Tactics” category. There are so many counter-arguments to supposedly popular claims and challenges, and so much to say about most of them, that it will take quite a while to poke at all of them.
It might be prudent at this juncture to inform readers that I have been skipping many of the challenges, because they aren’t worth talking about, or because the challenge itself is a weak one that atheists shouldn’t even be issuing, or for any number of reasons. Some of these include “There is no truth,” “Who are you to say?” and “Christians are hypocritical and judgmental.” There are many reasons why I haven’t looked at these, the most important of which is that atheists should avoid getting into the muck in which they’ll find themselves when they start making these arguments.
With no further ado, let’s jump right in!