New vid: argument from ignorance explained through mining

[Edwardo Piet]

[robvalue]

Ah, OK. So it focuses on the semantics angle.

The most common one I see in that category is "faith"; trying to equate religious faith with reasonable, evidence-based confidence.

Thanks for that, I was thinking it also covered faulty analogies, which I see incredibly frequently. That's what I was mainly referring to, although it appears they may not technically come under this heading. Things like "Just like a parent, God has to punish his children when they misbehave [by torturing them forever with no hope of redemption]."

Would you still like me to do a vid on the semantics angle, or the analogy one? Or both?

[Pizza]

[robvalue]

Thank you

The idea of claims that are true/false but can't be shown to be so can be a strange concept to grasp.

Even stranger is proving that there are true statements that can't be proven to be true... which has been done in mathematics.

[Edwardo Piet]

Would you still like me to do a vid on the semantics angle, or the analogy one? Or both?

I am a particular fan of the Equivocation Fallacy (when it comes to understanding it, avoiding it oneself when others use it).

But the false analogy one would be interested too.

If you want you can do the false analogy one first since you're ready for that... and then perhaps prepare for and do the Equivocation one for best turtle in your own time

[robvalue]

Sure!

I have a few ideas, I'll keep working on them and do a vid when I have the energy. Turtles are cute!

[Pizza]