Over 300 prooofs of Gods existance...

[Adept]

I found this largely amusing.

 

[heretic888]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

While I found some of the arguments to be crass and shallow (and clearly antagonistic) --- all in all, it makes for some great laughs and really reminds me of LOTS of "logical" arguments concerning religion that I have been tossed in my day.

Good stuff. :asian:

 

[Sam]

those arguments are all flawed.
besides all having their own flaws, one could say that they all comit the existential fallacy.

some of the other ones are just silly:

ARGUMENT FROM BELIEF
(1) If God exists, then I should believe in Him.
(2) I believe in God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

change the terms god to drinking a soda and believe into burp and see what you get

If I drink a soda, I will burp
I burped
therefore, I must have drank a soda.

or sometimes they use two different meanings of the same word

ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY
(1) Eric Clapton is God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

thats like saying
man is the most intelligent being on earth
therefore men are smarter than women

but your using both the definition of man meaning human kind and man meaning non-females.

I could go on for a long time but I don't feel like it.

thanks for the link though. It made me feel smart for a while. (can anyone guess who took logic last semester?)

 

[Shaolinwind]

I found this largely amusing.

Altogether amusing.

 

[Floating Egg]

Samantha,

I think it's meant to be funny.

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

Sam: "those arguments are all flawed. "

That's what makes them funny.


"(can anyone guess who took logic last semester?)"

At least someone is studying that subject! It seems like logic and critical thinking have completely been removed from peoples' educations.


One of the basic tools in logic is break down any argument into a series of premises and conclusions; intermediate conclusions form premises for later conclusions, etc. until one is left with a simple premise, and a single conclusion.


Most of the serious logical proofs for gods (Aquinas, Descartes, etc.) go like this after you break them down:

"God exists"
"...something something something..."
"Therefore, God exists."


Woo, pretty airtight!


Sam, Heretic, next time I find myself in a debate, I'm calling you guys in to help me.

 

[Ray]

"(can anyone guess who took logic last semester?)"

At least someone is studying that subject! It seems like logic and critical thinking have completely been removed from peoples' educations.

Critical Thinking is still a part of Sociology I. But don't apply any of it to what the prof says because (apparently) the prof is infallable.

Except for the syllogism about Clapton, the rest are spurious.

 

[arnisador]

Hard to argue with the Eric Clapton argument. I'm convinced.

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

Careful, God hates when people use logic, critical thinking or any use of human reason:




(Deuteronomy 29:19-20)
If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well enough if I follow the dictates of my heart," Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn against him. And all the curses written in the book will come upon him.

(Proverbs 3:5)
Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;

(2 Corinthians 10:5)
"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."

 

[arnisador]

Ah yes, the Babel Fish argument (from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Check and mate!

 

[Ray]

Careful, God hates when people use logic, critical thinking or any use of human reason:

(Deuteronomy 29:19-20)
If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well enough if I follow the dictates of my heart," Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn against him. And all the curses written in the book will come upon him.

According to the King James version, 29:19-20 is not about human reason, it is about turning away from God and following the imagination of your heart instead of God. Read at least from verse 10, which is the start of a new paragraph.

(Proverbs 3:5)Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;

and the continuation of that paragraph is "3:6 In all thy ways acknowledge him and he shall direct thy paths." Nothing wrong with looking for more knowledge or wisdom than we have. We even do the same when we ask for other people's opinions when making certain decisions.

(2 Corinthians 10:5)
"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."

The KJV "...and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" speaks more about our motiviations than it does reasoning and use of logic.

 

[heretic888]

those arguments are all flawed.

Um, well, Samantha.... that's kinda the point. :supcool:

Some of the arguments are purely in jest (such as the Eric Clapton one). Others, however, are very real arguments that a good number of Christian apologists use in what passes for "public discourse" these days. In either case, all of the arguments are 100% flawed.

A prime example, which has been used by apologists here in the Study on a number of occassions, would be the Argument From Unintelligence (number 15 on the list in question).

Laterz.

 

[heretic888]

At least someone is studying that subject! It seems like logic and critical thinking have completely been removed from peoples' educations.

Absolutely. In high school, I was in the International Bacceulareate program and ended up with several points of college credit by the time I got my degree. One would think such subject matter would be at least somewhat emphasized.

Guess what? I didn't even begin to learn about proper ways of formulating arguments, logical proofs and fallacies, and other such things until I went to college. And, that was only because I intentionaly chose to take the applicable courses in question (Philosophy and Critical Thinking).

The sad, sad truth is that such subject matter is not a part of most adult's educations.

One of the basic tools in logic is break down any argument into a series of premises and conclusions; intermediate conclusions form premises for later conclusions, etc. until one is left with a simple premise, and a single conclusion.

Yup.

Most of the serious logical proofs for gods (Aquinas, Descartes, etc.) go like this after you break them down:

"God exists"
"...something something something..."
"Therefore, God exists."


Woo, pretty airtight!

*laugh* Well, they aren't that lopsided, but some of them are pretty bad. Personally, I think Aquinas' arguments can be made into rather strong "plausibility" or "probability" arguments with a little tweaking...

Sam, Heretic, next time I find myself in a debate, I'm calling you guys in to help me.

Of course. :ultracool

 

[heretic888]

Critical Thinking is still a part of Sociology I. But don't apply any of it to what the prof says because (apparently) the prof is infallable.

Not to be rude, Ray, but this isn't the first time you've expressed such sentiments.

I've had a slew of different teachers and professors from roughly five different educational institutions. Some good, some bad. And, I can say from experience, that you're attitude is the result of either a) an utter lack of experience (re: limited sample), b) a lack of understanding what one's teachers are actually saying, or c) extraordinarily bad luck in getting continuously bad teachers.

In any event, your generalization isn't something that holds true across the board --- as I'm sure pretty much anyone here with a higher education will tell you.

 

[heretic888]

According to the King James version...

Y'know, I still find it amusing when people use the King James Version to tell others what the Bible "really says". Its hilarious.

 

[Jmh7331]

It seems like logic and critical thinking have completely been removed from peoples' educations.

That's because Management doesn't want us using our brains...uh-oh here comes my manager.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Absolutely. In high school, I was in the International Bacceulareate program and ended up with several points of college credit by the time I got my degree. One would think such subject matter would be at least somewhat emphasized.

Guess what? I didn't even begin to learn about proper ways of formulating arguments, logical proofs and fallacies, and other such things until I went to college. And, that was only because I intentionaly chose to take the applicable courses in question (Philosophy and Critical Thinking).

The sad, sad truth is that such subject matter is not a part of most adult's educations.




Yup.



*laugh* Well, they aren't that lopsided, but some of them are pretty bad. Personally, I think Aquinas' arguments can be made into rather strong "plausibility" or "probability" arguments with a little tweaking...




Of course. :ultracool

I went all through college and didn't observe very much useful about forming a logical argument. Fortunately, I determined early that I would seek out that knowledge on my own. When it comes to learning how to 'think', it is a skill best self-taught apparently, lest someone lead you astray. In fact, during college I started to wonder if some people were even capable of any real degree of logical reasoning.

 

[arnisador]

Logic is now taught via geometry, it seems, and even that's fading. It's been shifted to math. from philosophy which, sadly, has found no place in American high schools. It's no substitute for a philosphy course in 'practical argumentation' or the like.

 

[arnisador]

I went all through college and didn't observe very much useful about forming a logical argument.

What did you study?

Most humantities and social sciences displines claim that not only do they teach this but that they're the best place for learning it. But unless you take math., physics, or philosophy, you may never be truly challenged to defend an argument carefully, depending on your school and dept.

It's a shame. The freshman rhetoric and comp. courses could do this, if only students entered college knowing how to write a proper sentence.

 

[goshawk]

...Ow. The logical fallacies make my head hurt. ::wincing:: What's worse, though, is that I've heard a lot of these used in a serious discussion...and they made my head hurt then, too. =P I think that's their real purpose--give me a headache so I can't rebutt.

I took four years of Practical Reasoning and Critical Discourse through grades seven to ten; mandatory course in the private school I went to. My parents loved the idea, hated the practice as I started winning the arguments and they had to fall back on BIFI ("Because It IS").

'Course, then I went on to high school, where I was introduced to such interesting logic as, "well, we should have free food at lunch because it's not fair that we should have to pay to eat. Like, those stupid rich British Properties girls who always dress all skanky are making the rules. I mean, they don't own the place, and why should they be allowed to do that anyways? It's like, not fair." (actual argument I overheard, though paraphrased from memory.)

My God embraces logic, dammit. =P