RE: Logic 101
August 10, 2012 at 3:27 am
(This post was last modified: August 10, 2012 at 3:33 am by CliveStaples.)
Quote:Indeed.Man people don't seem to grasp the difference between "You are stupid BECAUSE you are a Christian (ad hominem) and
'You are stupid AND a Christian" (insult)
Insults are usually irrelevant and thus usually fall under red herring.
Quote:Not all believers are stupid,but most stupid people are believers.
Well, most everyone is a believer, period. So I would probably agree that most stupid people are believers; my guess is that most smart people are believers, too.
(November 29, 2011 at 3:34 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: Does anyone know what the fallacy of presenting the phenomena/place in question as "ontological proof" of any given supernatural being's existence is?
Like for example: "The Universe is proof of a God."
"The Forest is proof of Unicorns"
And so on...
Is that necessarily a fallacy? There is no phenomena or 'place in question' that gives an ontological proof for a supernatural being's existence?
If these are fallacies, I'd probably categorize them under non sequitur, since the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise.
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
