Coopernundrums » man

Debating Logical Arguments

JayCooper — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 04:18:25 +0000

I find that living in the “Bible” belt means I frequently have to defend my lifestyle, or beliefs. I know I really should move, I just love it a lot here. Its too bad that folks can’t be more open minded. Most of the defenses I tend to have to wade through are due to problems with the lines of thinking taught around here. Most college professors would define these as Logical Fallacies.

We use logical fallacies in casual conversation all the time. Using analogy comes naturally to most people. Poor analogies are as common as mud. Really solid analogies are few and far between. Someone using a fallacy isn’t necessarily using it maliciously or purposefully. Sometimes people mistake bad arguments for good arguments, and while it’s certainly proper to correct them, please don’t jump to the conclusion that they’re deliberately trying to mislead people, whether they’re an atheist or a theist.

The Straw Man:
A Straw Man is the misrepresentation or over-simplification of a position, making it easier to attack as opposed to dealing with the real argument. By knocking down the straw man (get it, straw men are much easier to knock down than real men?), they appear to have “won” the argument, when they’ve actually argued against a misrepresentation.

Examples:

“People who believe in God are just brainwashed and delusional.”
“Atheists are so skeptical that they won’t believe anything at all, no matter how much evidence there is.”

Loaded Question:
A loaded question or “trick question” is a question that presupposes something not in evidence. The most famous example is, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” because it’s quite clear that whether you answer “yes” or “no” you’ve implied that you have been beating your wife in the past.

Argument from Ignorance
An argument from ignorance argues that a claim is true because it has not or cannot be disproved. Russell’s Teapot provides an example of this argument.

Begging the Question
Begging the Questionis similar to a loaded question, in that the argument is already supposing its conclusion. I’m stealing my examples from Wikipedia, because they’re quite simple and also kind of hilarious:

“Why am I the boss? It’s because I call the shots around here.”
“Of course I had a reason, or I wouldn’t have done it.”
“I didn’t steal it. I’m no thief!”

False Dilemma/Trilemma/etc.
A false dilemma is a case where two alternative courses/answers are presented as if they are the onlytwo answers possible, when in fact, there are other possible explanations. C.S. Lewis’ famous “Liar, Lunatic or Lord” argument is a very famous false trilemma, presenting only three possibilities for Jesus’ behavior, when there are plenty of other possibilities. Pascal’s Wager also commits this fallacy, presenting atheism and Christianity as the only two belief systems to choose from.

Slippery Slope
A slippery slope fallacy claims that some event or decision would inevitably lead to a far-fetched or extreme end, when there is no logical chain implying that an extreme end would follow. It’s important to note that there are cases where a “slippery slope” actually exists – the difference between the fallacy and the real thing is whether or not there’s a logical chain of events that would lead down the “slope.” A much-used example is the claim that legalizing gay marriage will eventually lead to people gaining the rights to marry their pet fish, or their sofas.

False Analogy
A false analogyis a case where two things are compared that actually have important differences between them, but those differences are ignored and a conclusion is drawn based on the similarities. A good example paraphrased from Wikipedia: “The Sun is yellow. Bananas are yellow. Thus, the sun and bananas have the same mass.” It’s important to note that an analogy might work, to a certain point, but if taken too far, fall into being a false analogy.

No True Scotsman
This fallacy is committed when someone redefines terms based on whether certain undesirable traits might be connected to them. This is probably a poor summary, but I think the original example (from Antony Flew) should serve to illustrate better:

Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the “Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again.” Hamish is shocked and declares that “No Scotsman would do such a thing.” The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again and this time finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, “No true Scotsman would do such a thing.”

Some other fallacies you might want to look up include:
The Texas Sharpshooter
Accident and Converse Accident
Appeals to Consequences
Special Pleading
Appeals to Emotion
Argumentum ad populum

If you enjoy reading this and have an open mind check out The Friendly Atheist.

Hot Topics

JayCooper — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 02:05:07 +0000

Christian Johann Heinrich Heine born 13 December 1797, was a journalist, essayist, literary critic, and one of the most significant German poets of the 19th century. His radical political views meant that many of his works were banned by the authorities in Germany. Heine spent the last 25 years of his life as an expatriate living in Paris.

I bring up Heine in light of recent current events. Heine is actually admired and quoted by Friederich Nietzshe

“The highest conception of the lyric poet was given to me by Heinrich Heine. I seek in vain in all the realms of millenia for an equally sweet and passionate music. He possessed that divine malice without which I cannot imagine perfection… And how he employs German! It will one day be said that Heine and I have been by far the first artists of the German language.” – Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecce Homo

One of Heine’s best known quotes and the one that, to me seems the most relevant given the outright ignorance and idiocy that people have exhibited. I want to share it with you now. I would encourage you to read up on Heine as besides his amazing play from 1821called Almansor he was also a rather enlightened scholar of ancient religions or lack thereof.

“Das war ein Vorspiel nur, dort wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen.” (“That was but a prelude; where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people also.”)

No related posts.

Politics as Usual

JayCooper — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:58:41 +0000

The founding fathers were a variety of beliefs, many were indeed deists with close ties to Christianity. It is important to keep in mind that even with these convictions they were intelligent enough to realize and defend the right to freedom of religion. They wrote our founding documents with the intention that choice of religion must be left IN THE MIND OF THE INDIVIDUAL. They also understood that this choice should be protected and not influenced by goverment favortism or persicution.

It is easy for atheists to sometimes inadvertantly lend credence to the fallacy that the founders of our country were not religious individuals and wanted an atheist run goverment. I understand that many were indeed deeply religious. I also understand that because of what they had been through suffering their own persecution that they did not want a Christian use only government with all others being mere guests.

I like to think of the First Amendment as an anti-trust law that should prevent monopolies on power. This means that our goverment is not allowed to favor Christianity or any other religion. It is supposed to protect both theists and atheists from persecution.

I get pretty sick of people who dont study their history and make unfounded claims that atheists want to make religion illegal. We simply want to get OUR GOVERMENT, back to the neutral position the founders intended.

Prayer for example has not been outlawed in schools like they’d have you think. What is unconstitutional is creating a captive audience and forcing others to participate or to be singled out for not participating.

In conclusion, our government institutions have to be free from religious favortism or persicution, so that we all can be free outside these neutral institutions to practice or believe what we want. Independance comes with the responsibility that it is not anyone’s right to use goverment to monopolize what it means to be a citizen.

Math, Science and COMPUTERS

JayCooper — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 05:06:03 +0000

Working in the software industry for the last 10 years means I have had the pleasure of dealing with EVERY level of computer user you can imagine. I firmly believe that our schools are FAILING our children in one enormous fundamental way. THEY DO NOT SEEM TO TEACH KIDS ANYTHING ABOUT COMPUTERS!!

It seems very clear to me that we spend far more time teachin math and science and other sundry skills and almost nothing useful regarding the lubricant that runs our world. I have talked to accountants that know nothing about how their PCs work. I have spoken to sofware developers that have no idea that there are other operating systems outside of windows XP. I have talked to supposed IT administrators that have no idea what a command line code is.

It is very frustrating to me to see these and other highly intelligent individuals CRIPPLED by their lack of knowledge regarding the very thing that pays their bills.

I know I am ranting but I really believe that we need to speed a great deal more time educating folks about how PCs work from the inside out, not just what they can do. PC support and repair should be as much a foundation subject as English and Physical Education. Its a shame that in this day and age that we have so many people tha can not install simple software or uninstall it.

Then again..it means I stay in work and will always have a job..

Decade Dance

JayCooper — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:18:53 +0000

I was just introduced to the most brain stimulating debate I have had in while and I thought I would share it with you. It is not a new debate, certainly not when you’re dealing with millennia. Late last night I sat at the old computer gathering info about the last ten years for my end-of-year blog post and I came to the frustrating realization that there is actually a great deal of debate about this subject. It seems there is general confusion regarding how the decades and millennia are interpreted by the average Joe.

I must admit that I fell into the trap of believing the hype and had it embedded in my mind that the end of the first decade of the new millennium is about to end. Many people call this decade The Oughts or The ’00s. Clearly, then, the decade includes years that have zero as the third digit. Next year, that third digit turns to a 1, so the end of the decade obviously is at hand right? Consider also the popular terms affixed to decades. Since I am a child of the ’80s that would mean that can only years that include some derivative of 80 should be included. In no way can 1979 be considered part of the ’80s. Using that logic, 2010 must mark the beginning of the next decade. Webster’s New World College Dictionary defines a decade as “in common usage, a ten-year period beginning with a year 0, as 1920-1929.” All of these factors prove that this decade will end on Dec. 31, 2009, Right?

Another school of thought says that as we age, we are not said to be 1 until after living 12 months, and we do not celebrate a 10th birthday until after living 10 years. Logical conclusion: The next decade won’t begin until after 2010 concludes. If you think about millennia the first one thousand years started with the number 1 and thus ended with 1000. This means those years 1001 through 2001 would equal the second millennium. Following this logic the first decade of this millennium began with the year 2001, and the last year of the first decade of this millennium will be next year, 2010. This is a very compelling argument.

Does that mean Webster’s dictionary is wrong? No, the definition mentioned earlier, pertained to the “common usage” of the word. The same dictionary also defines a decade as “officially, a ten-year period beginning with the year 1, as 1921-1930.” Webster apparently wants to make everyone happy.

It seems like the debate itself will be lost in the sea of media outlets and emotional minds ready for this decade to be over. I for one am happy, since it gives me two years to consider and be respectful of all the wonderful, wondrous and sad things that have occurred in the last ten years.

Happy new year all!

The great “Christmas” Caper

JayCooper — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 06:34:34 +0000

Atheists get a bad rap in my opinion. We like a good party just like the rest of the world. We like Evergreen trees and wreaths and twinkly lights and delicious home cooked meals as much as all the theists out there. We ge spanked pretty hard by the theists at this time of year. I think we should start a movement to take back this holiday for ourselves. After all, it belonged to us first. In fact, one could make an intelligent argument that it was stolen from us. Myself, personally, I also have this nagging need to know why people do the things they do. So here are some facts that you may or may not find interesting about the holiday lovingly referred to as “Christmas”.

– No one celebrated “Christmas” until over 300 years AFTER the death of the man called Jesus

– December the 25th was originally a Holiday called the Natalis Solis Invicti, the Birth of the Unconquerable Sun celebrated by the Romans. This feast, which took place just after the winter solstice of the Julian calendar, was in honor of the supposed sun god, Mithras. You should note that the Romans were around at the same time as the man called Jesus.

– According to Biblical evidence surrounding his birth, Jesus could not have born in the wintertime, but is thought to have born in the fall, perhaps October. The date of Christ’s birth is not known. The Gospels themselves indicate neither the day nor the month.

- The practice of Christmas gift giving is not based on what was done by the Magi (or wise men). They did not arrive at the time of Jesus’ birth. The scriptures indicate that Jesus was a young child, possibly as much as two years old, living in a house by the time they arrived.

– In an attempt persuade pagans to accept the Catholic faith, the church took the celebration of the Saturnalia and a few other sundry pagan festivals, renamed it “Christ’s Mass,” and declared it “Christian.”

– Other aspects of Christmas were adopted later from other Pagan sources, such as the Christmas tree, the mistletoe, and the wreath, which were originally used by Pagans as symbols of fertility and life.

So, in reality it is the Christians, the Catholics in particular, that in essence hijacked the holiday of “Christmas” to persuade the rest of we pagans to join them. Thus we have the great “Christmas” caper.

sources : Encyclopedia Americana; The New Catholic Encyclopedia; The book Celebrations: The Complete Book of American Holidays by Robert J. Myers