Post by Athans on Dec 23, 2014 14:28:21 GMT -6
There was a Tweet by @toatheists that reads this...
"The world has a straw shortage - the atheists used it all up erecting their fallacious strawman arguments."
I retweeted this and found myself in a discussion about the topic, which exactly proves the point. Before we start, the definition of a straw man argument...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
"A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument."
"The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition."
Here is the discussion...
@davidcomfort: "@toatheists @kevinathans .But Deists have no straws bc God is a Premise not an Argument. Either you abandon Reason & believe, or you don't."
@kevinathans: "@davidcomfort @toatheists Though I believe a god should not be a premise, it is not unreasonable to believe in one."
@davidcomfort: "@kevinathans @toatheists .All depends on how one defines Reason, I suppose."
@kevinathans: "@davidcomfort @toatheists Reason and logic are different, for starters, but the conflict comes in when science does not provide answers. Science does not give us answers to the two biggest questions. I do not think it is logical to insert a god into the argument, but to believe a god answers those questions isn't unreasonable. Tho it will not convince an atheist."
@davidcomfort: "@kevinathans @toatheists .Genesis:Reason came frm Tree of Knowledge- A&E ate, sinned,God condemned them to suffering&death.Birth of Atheism?"
@kevinathans: "@davidcomfort @toatheists I see no reason to bring the Bible into this discussion. Reason is about a persons ability to work though a problm. A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument. You just brought the Bible into the argument. You created a straw man. Good job proving the original tweet."
They tried to debate the claim of straw man arguments by using a straw man argument...
It was fair for them to start with the deism,"premise" and logic and reason as a starting point, as all are relevant to the topic. By bringing in Genesis and Christianity, they created a straw man. I can easily refute or falsify Christianity. This argument does not have a single thing to do with Christianity. They brought it into the argument to refute it, to replace and misrepresent the original argument.
They used a straw man to refute the claim that they are using straw man arguments...
Who are the ones that have problems with logic, reason, and the English language?
"The world has a straw shortage - the atheists used it all up erecting their fallacious strawman arguments."
I retweeted this and found myself in a discussion about the topic, which exactly proves the point. Before we start, the definition of a straw man argument...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
"A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument."
"The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition."
Here is the discussion...
@davidcomfort: "@toatheists @kevinathans .But Deists have no straws bc God is a Premise not an Argument. Either you abandon Reason & believe, or you don't."
@kevinathans: "@davidcomfort @toatheists Though I believe a god should not be a premise, it is not unreasonable to believe in one."
@davidcomfort: "@kevinathans @toatheists .All depends on how one defines Reason, I suppose."
@kevinathans: "@davidcomfort @toatheists Reason and logic are different, for starters, but the conflict comes in when science does not provide answers. Science does not give us answers to the two biggest questions. I do not think it is logical to insert a god into the argument, but to believe a god answers those questions isn't unreasonable. Tho it will not convince an atheist."
@davidcomfort: "@kevinathans @toatheists .Genesis:Reason came frm Tree of Knowledge- A&E ate, sinned,God condemned them to suffering&death.Birth of Atheism?"
@kevinathans: "@davidcomfort @toatheists I see no reason to bring the Bible into this discussion. Reason is about a persons ability to work though a problm. A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument. You just brought the Bible into the argument. You created a straw man. Good job proving the original tweet."
They tried to debate the claim of straw man arguments by using a straw man argument...
It was fair for them to start with the deism,"premise" and logic and reason as a starting point, as all are relevant to the topic. By bringing in Genesis and Christianity, they created a straw man. I can easily refute or falsify Christianity. This argument does not have a single thing to do with Christianity. They brought it into the argument to refute it, to replace and misrepresent the original argument.
They used a straw man to refute the claim that they are using straw man arguments...
Who are the ones that have problems with logic, reason, and the English language?