Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
if a person claims that atheists are "more objective" about sacred texts and believers;
then it follows that believers are "more objective" about atheism and atheists.
simple question:
those statements are either both true, or neither are true. which is it?
if a person claims that atheists are "more objective" about sacred texts and believers;
then it follows that believers are "more objective" about atheism and atheists.
simple question:
those statements are either both true, or neither are true. which is it?
I don't give much credence to either statement, but no, even if one is true doesn't make the other true.
if a person claims that atheists are "more objective" about sacred texts and believers;
then it follows that believers are "more objective" about atheism and atheists.
simple question:
those statements are either both true, or neither are true. which is it?
Well, first off it doesn’t have to be a both are or neither are conclusion . One group CAN be more objective than the other. It wouldn’t stand to reason that if parents are more objective about kids, then kids must be more objective about parents. Or that if law abiding people are more objective about criminals then criminals are more objective about law abiding citizens. Your premise is a fallacy from the get go.
I could agree that biblically knowledgeable atheists are more objective about Scripture, simply because they would read without a sectarian bias.
As to being more objective about theists, regarding what , specifically? I certainly wouldn’t agree that theists are objective about atheists. For most theists except for some liberal ones the standard premise is that atheists just hate god and wish to deny god so they can wallow in their immorality. Hardly objective.
But I don’t get what atheists would be objective about regarding theists .
Last edited by NatesDude; 11-19-2021 at 06:23 PM..
this came up on another thread.
if a person claims that atheists are "more objective" about sacred texts and believers;
then it follows that believers are "more objective" about atheism and atheists.
simple question:
those statements are either both true, or neither are true. which is it?
It is not a simple question because both theists and atheists have a preferred point of view with regard to the issues addressed. However, while their preferred points of view CAN bias their perceptions and objectivity, they need not and may not. So the premise that objectivity IS or IS NOT compromised by either point of view is invalid.
if a person claims that atheists are "more objective" about sacred texts and believers;
then it follows that believers are "more objective" about atheism and atheists.
simple question:
those statements are either both true, or neither are true. which is it?
Highlighted is alogism.
Hence, there is no question, as answer to alogistic question, per se, is alogism.
alogism = An illogical or irrational statement or notion.
an irrational statement or piece of reasoning.
absence of reason or logic; without being restricted by logic or rationality.
a mental act that ignores the laws and rules of logic and disrupts the harmony between thought and reality.
anti-rational nonsensical elements.
Irrationality; the rejection of logical thinking .
Beyond or outside the bounds of logic.
An irrational statement or line of argument; a logical error.
An inconsistency that follows no logical pattern
a statement that is nonsensical or illogical
An inconsistency or arbitrary situation that follows no logical pattern.
i agree
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 11-19-2021 at 09:04 PM..
if a person claims that atheists are "more objective" about sacred texts and believers;
then it follows that believers are "more objective" about atheism and atheists.
No that does not follow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
simple question:
those statements are either both true, or neither are true. which is it?
I think it all boils down to personality, reasons for beliefs, etc. No blanket statements regarding objective thought apply to either end of the spectrum.
A=B
B does not equal C.
Hence, A and B can't be compared logically, as same.
Ergo, ASSUMPTION that atheists are ...........
Does not logically conclude that theists are same, as atheists and theists are not equal in their core meaning/principles.
It is not a simple question because both theists and atheists have a preferred point of view with regard to the issues addressed. However, while their preferred points of view CAN bias their perceptions and objectivity, they need not and may not. So the premise that objectivity IS or IS NOT compromised by either point of view is invalid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
Highlighted is alogism.
Hence, there is no question, as an answer to alogistic question, per se, is alogism.
When the premise is not true anything that follows is irrational.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
