Cherry Picking

[popeyespappy]

Cherry picking and the concept of confirmation bias are probably very related to each other it seems ...

This

People, including atheists, tend to choose the things that agree with what they already believe.

[Faith No More]

Not being able to prove something wrong can be frustrating...but why go to that extreme? The burden of proof is on them to prove it.

But that only works if they understand the burden of proof.

And it's not so much frustration of not being able to prove them wrong(I've pretty much given up on that ever making a difference). It's the frustration of being unable to get them to accept that that is not a proper way to reason.

[Doubting Thomas]

Cherry picking and the concept of confirmation bias are probably very related to each other it seems ...

No doubt. Confirmation bias is simply cherry picking data, keeping that which confirms your beliefs and discarding the rest. It's the main thought pattern for conspiracy theorists, who hold onto their theories like it's a religion. I've found that the belief patterns between religious belief and conspiracy theories are very similar, and they both start with the conclusion and picking out the data which supports it while ignoring any which refutes it.

[Bad Writer]

Not being able to prove something wrong can be frustrating...but why go to that extreme? The burden of proof is on them to prove it.

But that only works if they understand the burden of proof.

And it's not so much frustration of not being able to prove them wrong(I've pretty much given up on that ever making a difference). It's the frustration of being unable to get them to accept that that is not a proper way to reason.

It's frustrating, but I won't give up my stance on the Burden of Proof just because they don't understand what it entails. Helping others see reason is something I'm fervant about as well. I don't think it's in my nature to give up (though a good break in the middle of a lengthy discussion can regenerate the mind wonderfully).

[Faith No More]

It's frustrating, but I won't give up my stance on the Burden of Proof just because they don't understand what it entails. Helping others see reason is something I'm fervant about as well. I don't think it's in my nature to give up (though a good break in the middle of a lengthy discussion can regenerate the mind wonderfully).

My time here on AF has severely disillusioned me with regards to helping some see reason. Too often my time here has shown that many reject reason in order to cling to pre-conceived beliefs and comforting myths and are unwilling to challenge them properly. As I had to referred to it in another thread, it feels like emptying an ocean with a spoon. I can't continue something that in all essence appears to be futile.

[Bad Writer]

Some things are impossible, like fitting a square peg into a round hole, but I don't believe anything is futile.

[popeyespappy]

[Faith No More]

Some things are impossible, like fitting a square peg into a round hole, but I don't believe anything is futile.

Convince GC that he uses shit reasoning, and I will become a believer, too.

[Bad Writer]

Some things are impossible, like fitting a square peg into a round hole, but I don't believe anything is futile.

Convince GC that he uses shit reasoning, and I will become a believer, too.

I don't think I need to convince him of anything. He has a choice to see things as they really are, and he chooses not to agree. All I can do is be consistent with my reasoning, and that's good enough for me.

[Faith No More]

I don't think I need to convince him of anything. He has a choice to see things as they really are, and he chooses not to agree. All I can do is be consistent with my reasoning, and that's good enough for me.

Right, but you can be consistent in your reasoning without engaging him in debate. I just don't see the point in doing so. I mean, how are you going to hone your debate skills against "Nuh uh, goddidit?"