Any person or scientist who claims to pursue truth has to take notice of the astounding research available. Evolution will be seen as the shamanism of age.
February 7, 2011
-
No, your face is a logical fallacy!
I think some of the arguments about arguments in this ‘how to’ are valid. (meta as that may be.) However, the same can be said for both sides. I do take issue with one of the repeated suggestions on how to counter these “falacies”: each one suggests that one should “demand” from the other as a solution. In my opinion “demanding” will only terminate discussion, not further dailogue. “Asking” will get you much further.
I have heard everyone of these “logical fallacies” used by those believing in evolution. The most common, in my experience, is for the evolutionist to drop a gentleman’s argument, and go straight to personal attacks. (I am sure some Creationist are guilty of this as well. But likely more often avoid it to maintain “moral high ground”.)
So I will add this one to the list:
Personal attack/one up-one down
This behavior has little to do with the subject or validity of either argument and more to do with psychological disposition. The evolutionist believes their theory to be correct and yours to be false, and therefore you are a “less then”.
The evolutionist becoming frustrated with what they see as an unreasonable argument, begins to dismantle the forum, by breaching etiquette, interruptions, demanding yes & no answers, then moves to indirect insinuations, demeaning, & defamatory statements; eventually landing on outright name calling, yelling, and threats of violence.
Usually this starts out as a sharp veer away from objective and earnest arguments into one sided illogical statements like:
“Also, there’s nothing in the Big Bang Theory that suggests random chance. It simply happened. We don’t know why, but it did.” (This is clearly a poor argument because asserting that a “theory” happened would make it no longer theory.)
Note a few incendiary statements on the “how to”:
“Creationists tend to ignore this fact, in favor of their quasi-masturbatory fantasies about a six-day creation timeframe and a Universe that is a paultry ten thousand years old.”
“continue with mindless religious yammering ad infinitum”
“TYPICAL CREATIONIST MORON”
I am okay with displaying some contempt for another’s theory, but not for the actual person.
The anonymous author actually suggests towards the end that belittlement and insult are acceptable forms of communication with those whom they disagree with. Which, in my opinion, essentially makes this “how to” a “how to attack”. Anyone can do that. I do like the breakdown of various argument tactics, and think they are worth review for BOTH parties.
When anyone exhibits a lack of respect for another’s opinion, not matter how strongly they disagree, the argument needs to stop. The opposing side has shown they are no longer willing to engage in reasonable dialogue, there can be little or no productive learning or dialogue from that point forward. Being abused, whether you are a creationist or evolutionist, or inbetween, is not right.
Ultimately I believe there are great scientists, theorists, and thinkers of Evolution’s persuasion that have a lot to offer those of the Creation concept, and vice-versa. Finding what you can agree upon, and working towards overcoming ignorance and dogma is a worthwhile pursuit. And yes, they exist on both sides.
I would also like to point out that this Tumblr will never engage in any of the manipulative and unproductive practices listed in the “how to”.
And, yes, carbon dating is to be questioned.
(Source: invaderxan)
