Talk:50 reasons to believe in God

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
I understand the need to remain entirely objective, but I'm having trouble coming to an answer that isn't a giant "you're an idiot" with response to "26. If man has evolved from an animal, why doesn't he behave like an animal? Yet man is civilised."  War, famine, corruption, oppression, slavery, hatred, racism, homocide, infantacide, genocide.  That's what runs through my head, and I don't think argument ad ignoratiam alone covers it.  Anyway, I'd be interested in how to elegantly, neutrally and directly explaining this one. --[[User:Zurahn|Zurahn]] 18:41, 18 June 2008 (CDT)
 +
 
To be honest, so much of this is simply gibberish, it's going to take a while to sort out proper responses.  And we thought Gish galloping was dead! [[User:Nullifidian|Nullifidian]] 14:01, 18 June 2008 (CDT)
 
To be honest, so much of this is simply gibberish, it's going to take a while to sort out proper responses.  And we thought Gish galloping was dead! [[User:Nullifidian|Nullifidian]] 14:01, 18 June 2008 (CDT)
  
 
Many of them can all be lumped together or the responses can be repeated.  For instance, 15-20 may probably all be dismissed with [[Douglas Adams]]' "sentient puddle" analogy.  Is there another name for that besides the fine tuning argument? --[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 15:37, 18 June 2008 (CDT)
 
Many of them can all be lumped together or the responses can be repeated.  For instance, 15-20 may probably all be dismissed with [[Douglas Adams]]' "sentient puddle" analogy.  Is there another name for that besides the fine tuning argument? --[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 15:37, 18 June 2008 (CDT)

Revision as of 17:41, 18 June 2008

I understand the need to remain entirely objective, but I'm having trouble coming to an answer that isn't a giant "you're an idiot" with response to "26. If man has evolved from an animal, why doesn't he behave like an animal? Yet man is civilised." War, famine, corruption, oppression, slavery, hatred, racism, homocide, infantacide, genocide. That's what runs through my head, and I don't think argument ad ignoratiam alone covers it. Anyway, I'd be interested in how to elegantly, neutrally and directly explaining this one. --Zurahn 18:41, 18 June 2008 (CDT)

To be honest, so much of this is simply gibberish, it's going to take a while to sort out proper responses. And we thought Gish galloping was dead! Nullifidian 14:01, 18 June 2008 (CDT)

Many of them can all be lumped together or the responses can be repeated. For instance, 15-20 may probably all be dismissed with Douglas Adams' "sentient puddle" analogy. Is there another name for that besides the fine tuning argument? --Kazim 15:37, 18 June 2008 (CDT)

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox