RE: My follow up to my other thread...
May 25, 2015 at 7:31 am
(This post was last modified: May 25, 2015 at 7:43 am by comet.)
(May 25, 2015 at 4:42 am)robvalue Wrote: Maybe one day atheists can just be called people, rather than people who don't believe in [insert your favourite magical buddy and optional storybook].
I get really sick of the idea that all atheists hold responsibility for the actions of each other. Of course I condemn any action anyone takes that I think is immoral. But I can't "leave atheism as a protest" now can I? Or try and "clean up atheism"? I can try and improve society, which is what I do anyway, in what little capacity I am able.
Cleaning up society means cleaning up people. That means police your own too.
(May 24, 2015 at 7:29 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Atheists are people, and therefore flawed, film at 11.
And, given that religion is an enterprise built on creating and manipulating the emotions of others, and that many people here were subjected to such, is it any surprise that some reactions are visceral? People don't like feeling exploited.
(May 24, 2015 at 5:56 pm)comet Wrote: Logical fallacy is a bullshit philosophy term for people that don't know what they are talking about.
The End
You're quite wrong, but thanks for playing.
If you need "logical fallacy" to show somebody they are wrong, neither of the debaters know what they are talking about. I haven't seen one example were that isn't true. Line up what you know. Draw a conclusion off of those "facts". "logical fallacy" never comes up between two people that know what they are talking about.
The only place it comes into plays in hypothetical's. IE making shit up. And even then it doesn't need to be present if you put a limit on what shit you are allowed to make up.
anti-logical Fallacies of Ambiguity
