Posts: 69269
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
161
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 2:29 pm
B-b-b-but, he has this book, see?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 35395
Threads: 1439
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 2:30 pm
(July 27, 2017 at 2:29 pm)Khemikal Wrote: B-b-b-but, he has this book, see?
I know, right. I have this comic book here that proves Wolverine is real.
"What a little moonlight can do." ~ Billie Holiday
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 2:53 pm
Posts: 35395
Threads: 1439
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 2:55 pm
(July 27, 2017 at 2:53 pm)SteveII Wrote: But your entire premise of all the NT players being fooled has absolutely no evidence except people were fooled before and since. In the absence of any real evidence of deceit it seems that is just an assumption entirely based on the supernatural content of the accounts. If that is so, you are question begging: the events are not evidence of the supernatural because the supernatural does not exist.
My proof that you were duped into believing in Christianity is that you believe in it.
"What a little moonlight can do." ~ Billie Holiday
Posts: 882
Threads: 6
Joined: November 14, 2014
Reputation:
26
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 2:55 pm
Posts: 11380
Threads: 16
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
119
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm
RoadRunner79 Wrote:I think it is a fancy way of promoting selective hyperskepticism and/or pseudoskepticsim. As you pointed out, what is an extraordinary claim; or for that matter, what is extraordinary evidence?
Yeah, I was just telekinetically hovering over my roof this morning and a thousand people saw me, right after I put my pants on.
Really, who can tell whether it was the hovering or dressing that's the extraordinary claim? It would take selective hyperskepticism and/or pseudoskepticism to be able to pretend to tell the difference.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Posts: 882
Threads: 6
Joined: November 14, 2014
Reputation:
26
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 3:19 pm
I would like to see hyper skepticism applied to god claims then.
There is only skepticism, evidence and evaluation, scientific method then peer review.
Contingent conclusions then further analysis and review.
Supernaturalism has never succeeded yet. The reasonable current inference is that it is un-evidenced and natural explanations are.
Posts: 11380
Threads: 16
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
119
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 3:20 pm
RoadRunner79 Wrote:No that is the argument from incredulity. I was talking about the reasoning of because it's old which was in response to "considering the age of the book of mythology".
Now if you are not trying to make a case against the thing thing in question, but just commenting on your subjective mental state that is fine. And I agree, we shouldn't just accept everything without reason.... however if you are doing so for irrational and fallacious reasons, that doesn't make it bullshit.
An argument from incredulity occurs when someone asserts that something didn't happen because they cannot personally understand how it could happen.
'A miracle didn't happen because I don't believe in God and I don't see how it could have happened without an omnipotent being to pull it off' is an example of an argument from incredulity.
'I don't believe it because the evidence for it is hearsay, and ancient hearsay with no provenance to boot' is not an example of an argument from incredulity.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Posts: 69246
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 3:30 pm
(July 26, 2017 at 9:10 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: I'm still laughing at Steve asking "What is the evidence for atheism?" seriously. And always relying, blatantly, on the popularity of his religion as though it's an accurate measure of its veracity in every conversation, as if it's a rhetorical magic bullet.
The one thing we know is that there are plenty of fucking fools who believe anything they are told. How else did the WLB get elected?
Posts: 11380
Threads: 16
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
119
RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 3:31 pm
(This post was last modified: July 27, 2017 at 3:33 pm by Mister Agenda.)
RoadRunner79 Wrote:Whateverist Wrote:My sentiments to a T. Rather than argue for the superiority of your epistemic position, the essence of faith would be to admit its frailty and persist nonetheless. If you have so little faith anyhow, why is it important to convince us? Convince yourself.
I think that you have a different understanding of faith than I do. And I don't consider my faith weak, but strong because of the evidence.
It seems like the faith needed to believe something would be inversely proportional to the evidence available to support it. But what's the evidence, again? I seem to missed your attempt to present it.
Neo-Scholastic Wrote:The whole point of the scientific method is to remove subjective judgment from the evaluation of a hypothesis. The irony is that when it comes to anything remotely hinting at the supernatural, in trots the highly subjective criteria of 'extraordinary'. These pseudo-skeptics are a bunch of hypocrites. It's all science, science, science, until its something they don't like and it suits their incredulity its science+. "Oh, yes that's evidence, but its not EXTRAORDINARY evidence"
Yeah, I was just telekinetically hovering over my roof this morning and a thousand people saw me, right after I put my pants on.
Really, who can tell whether it was the hovering or dressing that's the extraordinary claim? It would take selective hyperskepticism and/or pseudoskepticism to be able to pretend to tell the difference.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
|
