Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
Are you sure that's what you're trying to say? I thought you were trying to describe someone who thinks that hammers can drill screws into wood...
My claim is that people don't think critically of their own beliefs. They asymetrically apply reason to other people's beliefs and not their own. It sounded like your rebuttal is that logic and reason can only do so much and we're forced to be stupid. Before I attack a strawman, let me ask you: what were you trying to say?
|
Logic and reason can only do so much, why would that make us stupid?
My claim is that there are plenty of people who seem to apply reason asymmetrically to other people's beliefs and not their own, and that from my experience a sizable portion of the people who claim to reject theism on the grounds that it is "unreasonable" fit this category.
Quote:
|
Honestly, do you see me doing this?
|
I can only assume you are referring to the final paragraph that you quoted, in which case, no, but I wasn't talking about you. You are not the focus of anything that I said in that paragraph. You can rest assured that when I am talking about you I will use the word "you".
Quote:
|
I've already stated that people have used the word "logic" colloquially and that it has a literal meaning that I often refer to as "formal logic." I've already stated that I prefer to use the term "reason" because what people use to rebut religion is not logic in the strictest sense. Does any of this ring a bell? Do you understand to whom you are speaking?
|
Yes, I know who you are and how you define things. What I'm saying is that the people who use the term "logic" colloquially use it because it lends a certain authority to their position that their position doesn't deserve. It's fine if one uses the term "logic" to refer to the relative agreeability of an argument, they just shouldn't be so dismayed when technically they're incorrect.
Quote:
|
For the record, I haven't co-opted the word "logic." My complaint is that people are not applying due critical analysis. They are willing to use logic and reason on anything except what they want to believe. My atheism is not just a philosophical stance, it's also a practical one. It's not just a "preference," like whether you enjoy chocolate or not. It's a claim that can and should be debated just like any in politics and it's just as important, too...
|
Again, I am not talking about you; your specific justifications for your atheism aren't what I'm interested in. My initial response to Mr. Rotten was concerned with debunking the idea that atheism is somehow the only logical position one can take with respect to the existence of god. That's the discussion I was having and that's the discussion you joined. If you want to talk about something else, lay out your position and if it interests me we can go from there.
Quote:
Only the ones that don't understand what strawmen are. For it to be a "strawman," I must claim that what you're saying is that religion is oppressing me and then attack that oppression. Of course, I'm not doing that...
It's an expression of what I dislike about religion. Specifically, the state of religious affairs in the US right now. It's actually a bit of personal hyperbole since I'm not in the US right now but I feel for the American people who have to suffer through that nonesense! ...and I suppose I like to debate on webforums...
|
It's more of a red herring, my mistake. I'm always surprised how much google knows.
Quote:
|
If you're going to hold opinions or make claims about Richard Dawkins, you should probably have actually seen or read his material. Otherwise, you really are just attacking a strawman.
|
No, I wasn't attacking a straw man, I was
answering a question you asked. I am familiar with the Courtesan's Reply, which was written by someone other than Dawkins. I've already stated that I'm not that familiar with Dawkins' work directly, and that any claims I make about them aren't necessarily accurate. Does any of this ring a bell? Do you understand to whom you are speaking?
Quote:
|
Again, it depends on what you mean by "reality." Remember my criteria? Is "Iron Man is a good movie!" a statement of reality?
|
It's as much a statement of reality as "It's 6:30 p.m." What's your point?
Quote:
|
Oh, but you are being flip. My interest is, indeed, relevant since you have chosen to speak about this with... me...
|
Once again, I'm not interested in talking about why you are an atheist. I'm talking about the concept of logic as it relates to validating various ways of looking at the world.