RE: Question about meaning and perception of reality from a theist.
January 9, 2012 at 11:37 am
Variations on a familiar theme:
"Without God, there would be no basis for morality"
"Without God, there would be no reason to use logic"
"Without God, life is meaningless"
For starters, this is the logical fallacy called Appeal to Consequences
The universe is not under any obligation to conform to what we wish to be true. Even if the above quoted assertions WERE true, they would be non sequiturs to the question of whether or not God exists.
Additionally, this familiar theme follows a familiar pattern:
1. Find a problem that doesn't exist.
2. Offer a vapid God(Verb)It to "solve" the "problem"
"Without God, there would be no basis for morality"
"Without God, there would be no reason to use logic"
"Without God, life is meaningless"
For starters, this is the logical fallacy called Appeal to Consequences
The universe is not under any obligation to conform to what we wish to be true. Even if the above quoted assertions WERE true, they would be non sequiturs to the question of whether or not God exists.
Additionally, this familiar theme follows a familiar pattern:
1. Find a problem that doesn't exist.
2. Offer a vapid God(Verb)It to "solve" the "problem"
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
