Common Logical fallacies by atheists
1. Argumentum ad verecundiam also called "appeal to authority".
This is very common.Why is something correct? Because Einstein (or someone else eg: Hawkings) said so.... How many times have you heard that?
b. Argumentum ad populum (argument or appeal to the public or Bandwagon fallacy): Not exactly but appeal to the scientific community is also usually used instead of using logic or ration.
2. Equivocation
A very common fallacy used by atheists. The best way to avoid the fallacy of equivocation is to define a word. But they will never do that, as it will destroy their religion.
"Exist" is a word that confuses them very much.They do not understand it has two meaning that can mean an object or a concept.
3. Reification
Similar to equivocation. It is treating concepts as an object.
Atheists for the life of them, can't understand that "time" is a concept and "clock" is an object.
4. Petitio Principi or begging the question
Here the premise and the conclusion is same. Eg: Time exists hence GPS works.GPS works there for time exists.
5. Ignoratio elenchi
Similar to Petitio Principi... When it is pointed out that it is the clock that is slowing they invariably conclude that time slows.
6. Argumentum ad nauseam
Trying to prove something by repeating it over and over again... GPS works, GPS works, GPS works,....the only argument.
7. Red herring.
An irrelevant topic introduced in an argument to divert the attention of listeners. When pointing out that time is a concept they bring GPS out and goes on discussing that.
1. Argumentum ad verecundiam also called "appeal to authority".
This is very common.Why is something correct? Because Einstein (or someone else eg: Hawkings) said so.... How many times have you heard that?
b. Argumentum ad populum (argument or appeal to the public or Bandwagon fallacy): Not exactly but appeal to the scientific community is also usually used instead of using logic or ration.
2. Equivocation
A very common fallacy used by atheists. The best way to avoid the fallacy of equivocation is to define a word. But they will never do that, as it will destroy their religion.
"Exist" is a word that confuses them very much.They do not understand it has two meaning that can mean an object or a concept.
3. Reification
Similar to equivocation. It is treating concepts as an object.
Atheists for the life of them, can't understand that "time" is a concept and "clock" is an object.
4. Petitio Principi or begging the question
Here the premise and the conclusion is same. Eg: Time exists hence GPS works.GPS works there for time exists.
5. Ignoratio elenchi
Similar to Petitio Principi... When it is pointed out that it is the clock that is slowing they invariably conclude that time slows.
6. Argumentum ad nauseam
Trying to prove something by repeating it over and over again... GPS works, GPS works, GPS works,....the only argument.
7. Red herring.
An irrelevant topic introduced in an argument to divert the attention of listeners. When pointing out that time is a concept they bring GPS out and goes on discussing that.
No comments:
Post a Comment