agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Atheism Culture Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization

Further on Sev (and EG) vs the Christian Faith in community

Some of our frequent commenters have recently made fairly explicit claims against/challenges to the Christian Faith, especially as it intersects community. For one, in responding to my earlier headlining of a response to his claims, Sev has now gone on record: Sev, 2: >> where some Christians imply that the faith as a whole has Read More…

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Science, worldview issues/foundations and society

On Sev’s “privileg[ing]” vs liberty as the due balance of rights, freedoms and duties (also, on truth vs warrant)

Sometimes, one of our commenters raises a significant matter that is worth headlining and further analysing. In a recent thread, Seversky dismissies Christian concerns about anti-Christian bigotry, bias, lockouts and the like, with: Sev, 14: ” This doesn’t sound like a crusade against Christianity so much as the faith playing the victim because they are Read More…

Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Design inference evolutionary materialism's self-falsification Logic and First Principles of right reason

Monod’s “objectivity” (= naturalistic scientism) and begging big questions

Jacques Monod won a Nobel Prize in 1965 for work on the mechanism of genetic replication and protein synthesis. By 1970 – 71, he published a pivotal book, known in English as Chance and Necessity, which is a part of the context in which Design Thinkers have argued that no, intelligently directed configuration, design, is Read More…

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Correcting trollish fallacies Darwinist rhetorical tactics Design inference

drc466 exposes the argument from incredulity fallacy

Here at UD, we will headline particularly noteworthy comments spotted in discussion threads. Today, drc466 has a gem, in the Show a Natural OoL for $10 mn prize thread,: drc466 , no. 21:] “there is nothing more irritating than the constant (invalid) refrain from evolutionists of “argument from incredulity”. And the variant “God of the Read More…

Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Epistemology (the study of knowledge and its conditions) Intelligent Design Logic and First Principles of right reason

Logic and First Principles: Summarising first principles and duties of reason

As we continue to ponder the core of responsible rationality, it is helpful to ponder a summary of what we have won: I recall, way back, being taught how the seventeen first equations of Boolean Algebra [which can all be verified as equivalence relations through truth tables] were of equally axiomatic status. But then, I Read More…

Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Education Epistemology (the study of knowledge and its conditions) Logic and First Principles of right reason

The issue of epistemic rights and duties

Back in 2007, “todangst ” of the “rational response squad” atheistical site wrote: To say that I am within my ‘epistemic rights’ to hold to a claim, I am saying that I violate no epistemic responsibilities or obligations in believing in my claim. (Rights and responsibilities go hand-in-hand.) An epistemic obligation is an intellectual responsibility Read More…

Atheism Culture Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Logic and First Principles of right reason

EG vs objective reality (pivoting on distinct identity)

In a current thread frequent objector EG comments — and yes, I am catching up: KF and others talk about “objective” as being something that is unchangeable. For example, homosexuality is objectively wrong. Always was, always will be. This doesn’t change with the times. But you argue that my preference of ice cream flavor is Read More…

Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Epistemology (the study of knowledge and its conditions) Logic and First Principles of right reason

JCW on the need to face inescapable, necessary first truths

Famously, Epictetus had an exchange with someone on the necessity, credibility and utility of logic: DISCOURSESCHAPTER XXV How is logic necessary? When someone in [Epictetus’] audience said, Convince me that logic is necessary, he answered: Do you wish me to demonstrate this to you?—Yes.—Well, then, must I use a demonstrative argument?—And when the questioner had Read More…

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Atheism Correcting trollish fallacies Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Epistemology (the study of knowledge and its conditions) Logic and First Principles of right reason

Sci Fi Writer John C Wright on self-evidence, honesty and reason

Mr Wright observes: From time to time it is useful for sane men in an insane world to remind themselves of basic truths.The first truth is that truth is true. A statement that there is no truth, if true, is false. We know this truth is basic because without it, no question can be answered, Read More…

Back to Basics of ID Complex Specified Information Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Intelligent Design

Guest Post, Dr YS: “Intelligent Design and arguments against it”

Dr YS, contribtes thoughts again that are well worth pondering: >>I’d like to present a summary of the arguments against the design hypothesis that I have come across either as a reader or as an author of a pro-design blog over the past 8 years since I became interested in intelligent design. The Design Hypothesis Read More…

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Epistemology (the study of knowledge and its conditions) Logic and First Principles of right reason Science, worldview issues/foundations and society

Sean Carroll: “Nowadays, when a more scientific worldview has triumphed and everyone knows that God doesn’t exist . . . ” — really?

Carroll, here, was responding to a Weekly Standard cover article on the reactions to philosopher Nagel’s publication of Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False : What I find particularly interesting in the captioned clip is the laudatory reference to “a more Scientific WORLDVIEW” which is immediately problematic, Read More…

Darwinist rhetorical tactics Epistemology (the study of knowledge and its conditions) Logic and First Principles of right reason

Logic & First Principles: What about “appeal to consequences” (vs. reductio ad absurdum)?

In a current thread, frequent objector, Seversky, posed a one liner objection intended to dismiss an OP: “Argumentum ad consequentiam.“ This raises an obvious issue on logic and linked epistemology, as argument by reduction to absurdity (which is broader than simple logical contradiction) is a well recognised argument type. Where, also, the issue is not Read More…

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Answering the problem of evil (vs good) Atheism Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Evolutionary materialism's amorality governance Laws Lessons of History Media Manipulation, Agit-Prop &/or Lawfare Selective Hyperskepticism

Does The Bible “condone” slavery, even as Darwin opposed it?

It seems, this issue is on the table here at UD again, and it needs to be publicly corrected for record. As a first step, I link a discussion in response to the oppression thesis used to try to discredit and marginalise the historical contribution of the Christian faith (and to create the false impression Read More…

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Correcting trollish fallacies Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Selective Hyperskepticism

“If it fits into a nutshell . . .”: on, the error of demanding arbitrary, rhetorically loaded brevity

I noticed that the objection of dismissal on length (without substantial consideration) has come up here at UD yet again. I think it appropriate to note its fallacious character where considerable reflection is required. (And BTW, a quote from a serious source is a legitimate approach as I will shortly exemplify.) Accordingly, let me headline Read More…