« Scattershots – 15nov17 (update 18nov17) | Main | Sandbox - 20nov17 »

17 November 2017


jon smith

". . . .wherein one ‘asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false’. Both appeal to the same logical fallacy.

Please explain the logic behind religion. To date no one has "proven" any one religion to be true. Religions are founded on faith and with every faith there is an elemental assertion that "it is true because it has not yet been proven false."

George Rebane

jons 502pm - Not sure of your point; perhaps you didn't understand the commentary. Re religions - these systems of belief have never succumbed to logic, but only utility. To the faithful they paint a plausible cosmology that is best enjoyed without too much critical examination.


You don't want to "believe" jon? That's your business.(unless your in Muslim land) You have the right "no to" here in the good ol' U.S. of A.(for now)
What's up? Take issue with Christmas?

Bonnie McGuire

Was it Ben Franklin who commented that the way a person thinks is their religion? There are many religious organizations where those with similar minds (regarding spiritual attributes) gather together. Christianity has many different churches that reflect their focus on specific interpretation of biblical scripture...When one of his desciples complained that someone else was healing in Christ's name, he said it was okay cuz those for him weren't against him. His teachings are beautiful common sense showing the way to a better life and world. It's up to the individual to choose what kind of person and life they want. We're wonderful creations living in a magnificent seen and unseen universe waiting for each of us to experience.

jon smith

GR 5:18
VERY good explanation and quite a thoughtful response. Yours is likely the most frank and honest reply I've ever heard from a believer. Thank you.

Walt- I was raised in a Christian household. Much of my youth was spent in Ireland where sects of Christianity are taught and practiced with a ferocity you wouldn't begin to understand. The experience(s) left me appalled and with the belief that no one's God is any better than another's. God is not benevolent if his teachings incite the violence I experienced and have witnessed around the world since. Neither Christians or Muslims have a lock on the practice of partisan politics, greed and non benevolence.

BTW- I enjoy Christmas; the way it is practiced in Europe - simple greetings, family dinners, prayers of thanks and maybe a simple gift such as a baked pie or a knitted sweater. You can take the American version of the "holiday $pirit" and flush it down the sewer.

Account Deleted

J smith 6:29 - "God is not benevolent if his teachings incite the violence..."
There is no Christian teaching that incites violence.
There are hypocrites and phonies all the way up to the pope man and and all the way down to the local Bible-thumping loud mouth that beds half the women in the congregation.
They are not Christian teaching. Please read the Bible and try to find where Christ told his followers to act violently towards others.
I'm sorry you had to grow up around folks that didn't, couldn't or wouldn't follow the teachings of Christ.
Please try to put the blame where it belongs. That may involve folks very close to you, but it doesn't lay any fault with Christ or his teachings.

Bill Tozer

jon smith @ 5:02 pm.

Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
——Rule #4, Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals.

The above quote can be applied to just about any group, or anyone who considers themselves associated with any political label. For example, the most outspoken anarchist may be the first to sign up for food stamps.

I throughly enjoyed these words Dr. Rebane penned.

“......The preceding semantical gymnastics are usually part of a drill that starts by characterizing everything in black/white or binary terms. If you don’t explicitly condemn/embrace something, then the clear conclusion is that you must love/hate that same thing. This is the most common and ham-brained way of rejecting the cautionary wisdom that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Related to this is the so-called ‘argument from ignorance’, so popular today, wherein one ‘asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false’. Both appeal to the same logical fallacy.”

It’s this black and white world here on RR by a limited few posters (thank goodness) that gets my goat. Example: The Russian Embassy in DC, knowing full well they were being bugged and monitored 24/7, cheered when Trump won. If I do not agree that is proof that the Russians hacked the election for Trump, then it means I love Putin. Nevermind the Russians are masters of disinformation, do everything methodical, and chances are they would have cheered if Hillary would have won, both scenarios staged for the listener on the other end of the wire to serve Russia’s own self interests.

Another example is Roy Moore. Some here have not condemned him nor defended the man. Some have a wait and see attitude, especially concerning accusations surfacing in the closing days of a heated election that happened 38-40 years ago when memory clouds the mind, coming to surface only after the Judge served in the state legislature, DA’s office, and being elected twice to the State Supreme Court over a 40 year career. That silence means to the black and white mind that the silent ones support unwanted sexual advances on the fairer sex, or worse, condones child predators. It’s the debate tactic Punchy uses ad nauseam. No, it’s not all black and white. There are absolutes, mostly ideals in a very pragmatic imperfect world that none of us can live up to, no matter how great the desire or intentions.. Talk about painting with the broad brush, lol.

One of my favorite sayings goes along these lines: Saying there are no absolutes is in and of itself an absolute statement. Yeah, she said she would love me forever. That did not work out. She is a liar!! And if you don’t agree with me, you condone lying.:)

Oh, the definitions derby.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad