I was going through the forums here and I saw someone's picture saying something along the lines of giving children logical explanations; not magical explanations. The meaning of the word logical is misused here because we can come to logical conclusions based on false premises which is logical. So, theists aren't illogical, but their logic for concluding the existence of their deity to be true is based on a different set of premises that most atheists wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.
You may be thinking that the semantics aren't important but using words more accurately in this case will avoid theists from having to explain the semantics to us. Besides, we look stupid when we use logical to mean 'whatever leads to our conclusions'.
The difference between our logic and their logic I would say is the type of 'knowledge' our logics are based on or even based on our different definitions of what is knowledge. The atheists logic is usually based on general or common experience, the experience of many, the testable and repeatable, what is peer reviewed. From what I've read on the forums and other, theists logic - which leads to the conclusion that their deity exists - is based on isolated experienced, personal experience, anecdotal even.
Theists may think that they are speaking from common experience when they say they know many people that have answered prayers but each individual testimony does not count as repeatable, testable, or review-able.
We could also point out that a lot of their logic is based on a poor understanding of probability but I guess I'll leave that for another post or someone else to post about.
What do you think about theist logic and atheist logic? Am I wrong about logic entirely? Is their only one logic?
You may be thinking that the semantics aren't important but using words more accurately in this case will avoid theists from having to explain the semantics to us. Besides, we look stupid when we use logical to mean 'whatever leads to our conclusions'.
The difference between our logic and their logic I would say is the type of 'knowledge' our logics are based on or even based on our different definitions of what is knowledge. The atheists logic is usually based on general or common experience, the experience of many, the testable and repeatable, what is peer reviewed. From what I've read on the forums and other, theists logic - which leads to the conclusion that their deity exists - is based on isolated experienced, personal experience, anecdotal even.
Theists may think that they are speaking from common experience when they say they know many people that have answered prayers but each individual testimony does not count as repeatable, testable, or review-able.
We could also point out that a lot of their logic is based on a poor understanding of probability but I guess I'll leave that for another post or someone else to post about.
What do you think about theist logic and atheist logic? Am I wrong about logic entirely? Is their only one logic?
