UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 10 to Meditation 282
Superman would be a better analogy.

by Jorge

To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form.

An Apology

I made a mistake. I made a mild joke to lighten things. It was at the expense of another. I regret the "subtle" remark. I apologize to Thomas.

Ad Hominem

The "subtle" remark was ad hominem. This type of argument should not be used.

The other remarks, which Thomas called ad hominem, were not. They described the failed analogy.

Straw Man intended to be knocked down

Thomas wrote:

"God arguments = pink space bunny arguments = strawman."

Thomas and I agree invisible pink bunnies are a straw man argument.

Are God arguments a straw man?

Believers believe in God. They are not putting forward an argument intended to be easily knocked down when they put forward an argument for God. They want us to believe it. As "straw man" is used by most people, the argument for God as presented by believers is not a straw man.

Analogy with God - Analogy with Mythical God:
They are different.

Thomas wrote:

"c.) An arguments for any (all) mythical gods are strawman arguments."

This is not the issue.

Those who use invisible pink bunnies should not be drawing an analogy with mythical gods.

To try to draw that analogy is the classic error in logic of assuming your conclusion.

The analogy should be drawn with the supposedly real gods that believers claim to exist. That is why the invisible pink analogy is wrong. It does not address the the ways in which these supposedly real gods affect the real world.

As you wrote, Thomas - except that it applies to you:

"The analogy is not what you think it is – nor what you’ve addressed."

Powers of Gods

Invisible pink bunnies do not have superpowers. The gods of believers supposedly do.

Superman would be a better analogy.