(August 9, 2015 at 9:58 pm)Alex K Wrote:(August 9, 2015 at 9:53 pm)Pyrrho Wrote: It seems pretty embarrassing to me. Even if it worked as an argument (which it obviously does not), it also seems more supportive of an incompetent, amoral god, than what the religionists want to conclude from it. If this is the best that god could do, he should go back to the drawing board and work out the details a lot better before creating anything.
I can think of many more embarrassing ones ("But but but if there is no God then when I die it's all over. There must be a God or I haz a sad!!!"), but can you think of a less embarrassing one?
Since they are all fallacious, it is likely more a matter of taste than anything else for which bad argument is more or less embarrassing than another. But, of course, one can always come up with total non sequiturs to vie for something worse than the ones that one typically finds people putting forth.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
