RE: Dr. Craig is a liar.
May 14, 2016 at 10:13 am
(This post was last modified: May 14, 2016 at 10:14 am by The Reality Salesman01.)
When you set out to do research to prove what you want to be true, it's easy to overlook alternatives. I have a hunch that somewhere deep down we know that we cheated ourselves and rushed to a conclusion because when someone easily points to an example of something we overlooked in our attempts to confirm a bias, it causes a defensive "nuh-uh!" reaction.
And to Rhythms point, if I told my son to put his shoes on; and when I come downstairs he's watching tv, still barefoot. He will likely tell me "I couldn't find them", his argument is essentially-"there are no shoes to be put on my feet, therefore I should not be expected to be wearing any". If I ask "did you look in the closet?", I don't personally know whether or not the shoes are actually in the closet, but by pointing out that there is a place he didn't look, I've invalidated his conclusion. His reaction is sometimes "nuh-uh, I never put my shoes in the closet, so I didn't check there"...we go upstairs, they're in the closet, and he is embarrassed. Not because the shoes were in the closet, but because he tried to defend the logic behind not having to look there.
And to Rhythms point, if I told my son to put his shoes on; and when I come downstairs he's watching tv, still barefoot. He will likely tell me "I couldn't find them", his argument is essentially-"there are no shoes to be put on my feet, therefore I should not be expected to be wearing any". If I ask "did you look in the closet?", I don't personally know whether or not the shoes are actually in the closet, but by pointing out that there is a place he didn't look, I've invalidated his conclusion. His reaction is sometimes "nuh-uh, I never put my shoes in the closet, so I didn't check there"...we go upstairs, they're in the closet, and he is embarrassed. Not because the shoes were in the closet, but because he tried to defend the logic behind not having to look there.
