Reasoning With Unreason, and Where It Gets You Sometimes
by Tom Gilson
[10:58] Here’s what I want. I want to see religious leaders held accountable for their b***s***. If you state as fact that which is not evidently true, you should be called out as a liar, just like the rest of us would be.
Hmmm… is that good logic, good reasoning? Let’s apply his test somewhere else. Consider someone who states as fact that there is no God. Is that evidently true? No. Is that person automatically a liar for saying that? No, again; for he could be mistaken, or (even though it’s not evidently true) he might be right. Either way he’s not a liar. The same applies for someone who says there is a God. So if you state as fact that which is not evidently true, that alone is insufficient to mark you as a liar. What this speaker has done has been to confuse the location of his negatives. To state as fact that which is not evidently true is not equivalent to stating as fact what is evidently not true.
Of course I think it’s evident that there is a God. I know that’s debatable. What’s not so debatable, though, is that this speaker has exhibited rotten logic with that opinion of his. His reasoning was embarrassingly poor, in view of his advocacy on behalf of reason….
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>