Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Atheism and logical fallacies (view source)

Revision as of 14:21, June 13, 2015

40,625 bytes added ,  14:21, June 13, 2015
no edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:  +
 +
== Logical fallacies that atheists commonly commit ==
 +
 +
Below are a number of logical fallacies that atheists commit:
 +
 +
=== Atheists and the fallacy of exclusion ===
 +
 +
''See also:'' [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]] and [[Christian apologetics]] and [[Arguments for the existence of God]]
 +
 +
[[Fallacy of exclusion]] - The fallacy of exclusion is a logical fallacy where "Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the 'principle of total evidence'."<ref>http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/exclus.htm</ref>.
 +
 +
==== Fallacy of  exclusion and the denial that Jesus existed ====
 +
[[Image:David Christ on the Cross.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[Jesus Christ|Christ]] on the Cross by [[Jacques Louis David]].]]
 +
''See also:'' [[Historicity of Jesus]] and [[Atheists and historical illiteracy]]
 +
 +
A classic use of the exclusion fallacy committed by many atheists is the denial that [[Jesus]] Christ ever existed.
 +
 +
Despite their being an abundance of historical evidence for [[Jesus Christ]] living in the first century, many atheists embarrassingly claim the Jesus never existed (see: [[Historicity of Jesus]]).
 +
 +
In an article entitled ''Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth'', Christopher Price wrote concerning individuals who insist that Jesus Christ was merely a mythical figure:
 +
{{cquote|I have often been asked why more academics do not take the time to respond to the Jesus Myth theory. After looking into this question, I discovered that most historians and New Testament scholars relevant to the topic have concluded that Jesus Mythers are beyond reason and therefore decide that they have better things to do with their time.<ref>[http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm ''Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth'' by Christopher Price</ref>}}
 +
 +
==== Unreasonable and inconsistent evidential standards ====
 +
 +
''See also:'' [[Atheism and irrationality]] and [[Atheist hypocrisy]]
 +
 +
Atheism, as defined by the ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', the ''Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', and other [[philosophy]] reference works, is the denial of the existence of [[God]].<ref>Multiple references:
 +
*Smart, J. J. C. (August 8, 2011). [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism "Atheism and agnosticism"]. ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' (Spring 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Retrieved July 17, 2014.
 +
*Sarfati, Jonathan, Ph.D. (23 June 2007). [http://creation.com/atheism-is-more-rational "Atheism is more rational?"]. Retrieved July 17, 2014.  See [[Creation Ministries International]], [[Jonathan Sarfati]].
 +
*Day, Donn R. (2007). [http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm "Atheism - etymology"].  Retrieved July 15, 2014.</ref> See also: [[Definition of atheism]] and [[Definitions of Atheist and Agnostic|Definitions of atheist and agnostic]] and [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism]]
 +
 +
Atheists demand proof and evidence for other worldviews, yet there is [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|no proof and evidence]] that atheism is true.  Also, despite the abundant [[Christian apologetics|evidence for Christianity]] and the lack of proof and evidence for atheism, atheist reject the truth of [[Christianity]]. Atheists refuse to go where the evidence clearly leads.
 +
 +
In addition, when atheist make claims related to [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]], make personal claims or make accusations against [[theism|theists]], they often employ lax evidential standards instead of employing rigorous evidential standards.<ref>
 +
*[http://vimeo.com/102663614 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 1]
 +
*[http://vimeo.com/103277405 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 2]
 +
*[http://vimeo.com/103865278 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 3]
 +
*[http://vimeo.com/105068126 Scientific Naturalism with J.P. Moreland, part 4]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>
 +
 +
Professor [[Richard Lewontin]], a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is one of the world’s leaders in [[evolution]]ary biology. He wrote a very revealing comment. It demonstrates the implicit philosophical bias against [[Genesis]] [[creation]] — regardless of whether or not the facts support it.<ref>[http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote Amazing admission]</ref>
 +
 +
[[File:113320508 2b86fdb94a.jpg|thumb|201px|right|The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''.  Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref> ]]
 +
Lewtontin wrote:
 +
{{cquote|Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.
 +
 +
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
 +
 +
The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that Miracles may happen.<ref>[http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote Amazing admission]</ref>}}
 +
 +
The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''.  Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>
 +
 +
===== Atheist community requested to provide proof and evidence that atheism is true  =====
 +
[[File:Zero scale.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|The popular YouTube Christian [[Shockofgod]] asked for proof and evidence that atheism is true. When atheism is weighed on the proof and evidence scale, it lacks evidential weight that it is a valid worldview. [[Christian apologetics website resources|Unlike Christianity]], there is no proof and evidence that atheism is true.]]
 +
 +
The popular Christian [[YouTube]] Christian [[Shockofgod]] likened atheism to a clown due to its hypocritical and foolish evidential standards.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref>  Shockofgod repeatedly asked the YouTube atheist community, "What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is accurate and correct?". 
 +
 +
The YouTube atheist community became flustered and upset by his question.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref> Shockofgod declared concerning their reaction to his question: "The hostility I am getting over this question is unbelievable...It's like..picture this...Atheism is a clown and it didn't know it. And then I got the clown and I walked it over...I forced it to look itself in the mirror. And it sees itself in all its red hair, big nose, big shoes, polka dot glory."<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjS__cWr0Y0</ref>
 +
 +
==== Atheism and extraordinary claims ====
 +
 +
Western Atheists often claim that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", yet they have no proof and evidence that the extraordinary claim of non-life becoming the first life solely through natural processes is true (See: [[Origin of life]]).<ref>
 +
*[http://carm.org/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence]
 +
*[http://theosophical.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/2830/ Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
 +
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRvJ-4WmJwk William Lane Craig debunks the atheist's "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?]</ref>
 +
 +
=== Atheists and the genetic fallacy ===
 +
 +
[[Genetic fallacy]] - The genetic fallacy is a [[logical fallacy]] wherein an argument is based on the circumstances of something's origin or history when that origin or history has nothing to do with the present value of that something.<ref>[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/genefall.html Fallacy Files: Genetic Fallacy]</ref>  The fallacy is thus a fallacy of relevance.
 +
 +
Rather than address the evidence offered against atheist arguments from various sources, atheists often lodge illegitimate and illogical genetic fallacy complaints such as the source is a Christian website, etc.
 +
 +
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|thumb|left|170px|The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows ...that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]]
 +
The [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]] [[C.S. Lewis]] wrote about the illegitimate and illogical use of the genetic fallacy in his essay entitled ''Bulverism''.<ref>[http://www.barking-moonbat.com/God_in_the_Dock.html God in the Dock - Bulverism]</ref>
 +
 +
A commonly ploy of atheists is to attempt to disqualify biblical writers on the spurious ground that they were allegedly superstitious and therefore their testimony is unreliable. Yet, the irreligious population has significant problem with superstition (see: [[Irreligion and superstition]])<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>
 +
 +
In September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
 +
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass [[superstition]]. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us.
 +
 +
"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians....
 +
 +
This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine ''Skeptical Inquirer'' that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}
 +
 +
==== Atheists, the genetic fallacy and false accusations of mental illness  ====
 +
 +
Atheists often falsely accuse theists (particularly those who criticize atheism) of mental illness<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/10/mailvox-continuing-education.html Mailvos - Continuing education]</ref>, despite the fact that atheists have higher incidences of depression and suicide (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and depression]] and [[Atheism and health]]).
 +
 +
Mental hospitals in the [[Soviet Union]] were used to persecute the religious.<ref>[http://www.roca.org/OA/5/5e.htm  The Cry of the New Martyrs - Psychiatric “Treatment” of Christians]</ref>
 +
 +
===== Sigmund Freud's view of religion =====
 +
[[Image:freud-thumb.jpg|right|200px|thumb|[[Sigmund Freud]] in his laboratory]]
 +
 +
''See also:'' [[Sigmund Freud's view of religion]]
 +
 +
[[Psychology|Psychologist]] [[Sigmund Freud]] was a proponent of atheism who argued that theism was detrimental to mental health.<ref name="christtoday">McGrath, Alister (February 28, 2005).  [http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/003/21.36.html "The twilight of atheism"].  ''Christianity Today'' website.  Retrieved on May 23, 2015.</ref>  [[Oxford]] Professor [[Alister McGrath]], author of the book ''The Twilight of Atheism'',  stated the following regarding Freud:
 +
{{cquote|One of the most important criticisms that Sigmund Freud directed against religion was that it encourages unhealthy and dysfunctional outlooks on life. Having dismissed religion as an illusion, Freud went on to argue that it is a negative factor in personal development. At times, Freud's influence has been such that the elimination of a person's religious beliefs has been seen as a precondition for mental health.
 +
 +
Freud is now a fallen idol, the fall having been all the heavier for its postponement. There is now growing awareness of the importance of spirituality in health care, both as a positive factor in relation to well-being and as an issue to which patients have a right. The "Spirituality and Healing in Medicine" conference sponsored by [[Harvard]] Medical School in 1998 brought reports that 86 percent of Americans as a whole, 99 percent of family physicians, and 94 percent of HMO professionals believe that prayer, meditation, and other spiritual and religious practices exercise a major positive role within the healing process.<ref name="christtoday">http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/march/21.36.html</ref>}}
 +
[[Image:Mayo-clinic-gondaoverview.jpg|thumb|right|200px|The [[Mayo Clinic]] found that that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.<ref name="Mayo">Mueller, Dr. Paul S. et al. (December 2001). [http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2811%2962799-7/fulltext "Religious involvement, spirituality, and medicine: implications for clinical practice"]. ''Mayo Clinic Proceedings'' vol. 76:12, pp. 1225-1235.  Retrieved from Mayo Clinic Proceedings website on July 20, 2014.</ref>]]
 +
The [[Mayo Clinic]] reported on December 11, 2001:
 +
{{cquote|In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.
 +
 +
The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.<ref name="Mayo"/>}}
 +
 +
Freud remains popular among [[postmodern]] literary academics, who use his [[anti-Christian]] pseudoscience as a basis for their own anti-Christianity and moral relativism, even though his theories were disproved decades ago.
 +
 +
=== Atheists and the strawman fallacy ===
 +
 +
[[Strawman fallacy]] - Many atheists/[[evolution]]ist commonly use the strawman fallacy.<ref>[http://www.bethinking.org/atheism/understanding-the-new-atheism A New Breed of Atheism]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/excellent-summary-of-so-many-strawman-arguments-used-by-anti-creationists ‘Excellent summary of so many strawman arguments used by anti-creationists’]</ref>
 +
 +
A straw man fallacy (or straw man argument) is a [[logical fallacy|fallacy]] which occurs by first incorrectly attributing an argument to someone, disproving this argument, then claiming that the person was wrong. It is a caricature of an opponent's [[argument]], a [[distortion]] which can easily be "knocked down" (i.e., refuted) like a flimsy pile of straw.
 +
 +
A strawman argument is a weakened version of a debating opponent's argument, which lacks the potency of the opponent's actual argument. In debates attended by the unwary, a clever but unscrupulous debater can fool the audience into thinking that the opponent's position has been disproved. Knocking down the powerless straw man takes the place of an authentic contest with the real man.
 +
 +
=== Atheists and the appeal to ridicule fallacy ===
 +
 +
''See also:'' [[Atheism and mockery]]
 +
 +
The [[Appeal to ridicule|appeal to ridicule]] fallacy, also known as the appeal to mockery and the horse laugh, is a [[logical fallacy|fallacy of relevance]].  It consists of mocking an opposing argument rather than considering it on the merits.
 +
[[File:Prise de la Bastille.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|On July 14, 1789, the [[Bastille]] was stormed by a mob and its prisoners freed, which is regarded as the start of the [[French Revolution]]. ]]
 +
 +
==== Appeal to ridicule fallacy and the history of French atheism ====
 +
 +
The [[Reign of Terror]] of the [[French Revolution]] established a state which was anti-[[Roman Catholicism]]/Christian in nature <ref>
 +
*Tallet, Frank [https://books.google.com/books?id=aL4lsWdd-rAC&dq=&hl=en Religion, Society and Politics in France Since 1789], pp. 1-17 1991 Continuum International Publishing
 +
*SPIELVOGEL, Jackson [http://books.google.com/books?id=ni4PSpOxb6MC&dq Western Civilization: Combined Volume] p. 549, 2005,Thomson Wadsworth
 +
*Latreille, A. FRENCH REVOLUTION, New Catholic Encyclopedia v. 5, pp. 972–973 (Second Ed. 2002 Thompson/Gale) ISBN 0-7876-4004-2</ref> (anti-clerical [[deism]] and anti-religious atheism and played a significant role in the French Revolution<ref>[https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/chap7c.html War, Terror and Resistence]</ref><ref>''Forging Freedom: The Life of Cerf Berr of M Delsheim'' by Margaret R. O'Leary,  iUniverse (June 1, 2012), pages 1-2</ref>), with the official ideology being the [[Cult of Reason]]; during this time thousands of believers were suppressed and executed by the [[guillotine]].<ref>Multiple references:
 +
<!-- Guillotine -->*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=bf3m7IVAa9gC&pg=PA461&dq=France+atheism+guillotine++Christians+executed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=l4lUUaTRBufG0QGe0IHACA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=France%20atheism%20guillotine%20%20Christians%20executed&f=false|title =''Christianity: The eBook''|author=James Adair|publisher = JBE Online Books|year=2007|quote=Although the Civil Constitution called for religious liberty, which was extended to Jews as well as Christians, many revolutionaries pushed for the establishment of a new state religion, either the Cult of Reason (atheists) or the Cult of the Supreme Being (Deists). Changes to the calendar eliminated references to Christian holidays, and even the ancient seven-day week, and a list of officially recognized saints included such famous thinkers such as Socrates, Jesus, Marcus Aurelius, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. A period of political persecution, often with religious overtones, broke out, known as the Reign of Terror. Thousands of people were executed by the guillotine, including many of the original leaders of the French Revolution.|pages=p. 461|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}
 +
<!-- France -->*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=9WkBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA105&dq=Reign+of+Terror+atheism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HoRUUcD0NeXX0gGNo4HIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Reign%20of%20Terror%20atheism&f=false|title =''Memoirs of the Reign of George III. to the Session of Parliament ending A.D. 1793'', Volume 5|page=105|author=William Belsham|publisher = G.G. & J. Robinson|year=1801|quote=In allusion to the monstrous transactions of this portentous period, it has been eloquently and energetically observed, 'that the reign of atheism in France was avowed the reign of terror. In the full madness of their career, in the highest climax of their horrors, they shut up the temples of God, abolished His worship, and proclaimed death to be an eternal sleep:—in the very centre of Christendom, Revelation underwent a total eclipse, while atheism, performing on a darkened theatre its strange and fearful tragedy, confounded the first elements of society, blended every age, rank, and sex, indiscriminate proscription and massacre, and convulsed all Europe to its centre, that the imperishable memorial of these events might teach the last generations of mankind to consider religion as the pillar of society, the parent of social order, and the safe-guard of nations.'<br>"It is wonderful that, amid the horrors of this dismal period, while 'the death dance of democratic revolution' was still in rapid movement, among the tears of affliction, and the cries of despair, 'the masque, the song, the theatric scene, the buffoon laughter, went on as regularly as in the gay hour of festive peace.'|pages=pp. 105-6|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}
 +
<!-- Reign of Terror -->*{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=Tt5rqiCP1p8C&pg=PA57&dq=Reign+of+Terror+atheism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HoRUUcD0NeXX0gGNo4HIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Reign%20of%20Terror%20atheism&f=false|title =''Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West''|author=William Kilpatrick|publisher = Ignatius Press|year=2012|quote=Actually, it's helpful to think in terms of two Enlightenments: the Enlightenment that cut itself off from God. The former led to the American Revolution, the Declaration of Independence, the abolition of slavery, and the civil rights movement. The latter led to the French Revolution, the Reign of Terror, the suppression of church by state, and the godless philosophies of Marx and Nietzsche and their offspring—National Socialism and communism. More recently the abandonment of God has led to the regime of cultural relativism that regards rights as arbitrary constructions.<br>"It's this second Enlightenment tradition that Cardinal Ratzinger referred to when he wrote, 'The radical detachment of the Enlightenment philosophy from its roots ultimately leads it to dispense with man.' Actually this transition happened not 'ultimately' but almost immediately. The first instance occurred when Enlightenment worship of abstract 'reason' and 'liberty' degenerated quickly into the mass murders committed during the antireligious Reign of Terror in France. 'Liberty, what crimes are committed in your name', said Madam Rolande as she faced the statue of Liberty in the Place de la Revolution movements before her death at the guillotine. She was one of the early victims of a succession of secular systems based on rootless notions of 'liberty', 'equality', and 'reason'.<br>"As many historians have pointed out, the atheist regimes of modern times are guilty of far more crimes than any committed in the name of religion. Communist governments alone were guilty of more than one hundred million murders, most of them committed against their own people.|pages=p. 57|accessdate = July 18, 2014}}</ref>
 +
 +
Kenneth Weinstein wrote in ''The American Interest'':
 +
{{cquote|[[Charlie Hebdo]] has suddenly become the best-known example of a venerable French tradition: vituperative and unrelenting anti-religious satire, a provocative yet regular phenomenon of French public life. And now—not, alas, for the first time in that nation’s history—it has occasioned actual bloodshed.
 +
 +
Lampooning of the Bible, Christian doctrine, and clergy dates back almost 400 years to the “strong thinkers,” French learned skeptics in the 16th century. The primary target of anti-religious satire was France’s official religion, Catholicism, the Church’s ties to the state, and its control over education. And the ridiculing wit long directed against these targets would eventually play a central and crucial role in reducing the status and influence of religion in the French Republic...
 +
 +
The method of the forerunners of Charlie Hebdo—unrelenting and vicious satire of religion and clergy — proved so effective that France became a fully secular state, to such an extent that certain of its practices, laicité, would be regarded as unsettlingly alien and intolerant by most Americans.<ref>[Charlie Hebdo and France’s Irreligious Tradition Kenneth R. Weinstein]</ref>}}
 +
 +
The tactic of employing the ridicule instead of reason has been ineffective in stopping the rapid growth of [[Evangelicalism|evangelical Christianity]] in modern France.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/0712/In-a-France-suspicious-of-religion-evangelicalism-s-message-strikes-a-chord In a France suspicious of religion, evangelicalism's message strikes a chord]</ref>
 +
 +
On July 12, 2012, the ''Christian Science Monitor'' reported:
 +
{{cquote|French scholars say, evangelicalism is likely the fastest-growing religion in [[France]] – defying all stereotypes about Europe’s most secular nation...
 +
 +
Daniel Liechti, vice-president of the French National Evangelical Council, found that since 1970, a new evangelical church has opened in France every 10 days. The number of churches increased from 769 to 2,068 last year.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/0712/In-a-France-suspicious-of-religion-evangelicalism-s-message-strikes-a-chord In a France suspicious of religion, evangelicalism's message strikes a chord]</ref>}}
 +
 +
Ridicule has been an ineffective tactic in modern France against the growth of Islam in France. The ''Washington Post'' declared in 2015: "One widely cited study by Pew from 2010 showed estimated that France had 4.7 million Muslims.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/map-frances-growing-muslim-population/ France’s growing Muslim population], Washington Post, January 9, 2015</ref> At 7.5 percent of the population, this meant France had the largest Muslim population in Western Europe.  A 2010 estimate projects the Muslim population to be 10 percent of France's population by 2030.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/map-frances-growing-muslim-population/ France’s growing Muslim population], Washington Post, January 9, 2015</ref>
 +
 +
In April of 2010, the British academic and [[agnosticism|agnostic]] Eric Kauffmann declared that "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Europe]] and [[France]]."<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/03/british-academic-eric-kaufmann-says.html British academic Eric Kaufmann says "the rate of secularisation has flattened to zero in most of Protestant Europe and France". Also, Kaufmann writes that secularism "appears exhausted and lacking in confidence"]</ref>
 +
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Matt Barber]] ]]
 +
 +
==== Modern American/British militant atheists and the use of ridicule ====
 +
 +
The [[New Atheism|new atheist]] Richard Dawkins declared to this fellow atheists:
 +
{{cquote|I suspect that most of our regular readers here would agree that ridicule, of a humorous nature, is likely to be more effective than the sort of snuggling-up and head-patting that Jerry is attacking. I lately started to think that we need to go further: go beyond humorous ridicule, sharpen our barbs to a point where they really hurt.<ref>[https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/dawkins-mock-them-ridicule-them-in-public/ Dawkins: Mock them. Ridicule them! In public]</ref>}}
 +
 +
In his article, ''Mockery - the M.O. for atheists'', [[Matt Barber]] discusses an incident in which the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]] encouraged atheists to engage in tactics which Barber considers to be acts of hateful mockery.<ref>[http://onenewsnow.com/perspectives/matt-barber/2014/05/08/mockery-the-mo-for-atheists ''Mockery - the M.O. for atheists''] by [[Matt Barber]]</ref>
 +
 +
Hateful mockery can backfire - especially when a group in the minority. Atheists are the least trusted group in America (see: [[Views on Atheists|Views on atheists]]).
 +
 +
=== Atheists and the appeal to emotion logical fallacy ===
 +
 +
Many atheists use appeals to emotion/arguments from outrage when criticizing the Bible - especially when they are engaging in cultural imperialism.<ref>[http://www.tektonics.org/lp/outrage.php Bible critics and arguments from outrage] by [[JP Holding]]</ref><ref>[http://www.tribosblog.org/?p=1640 Atheists and arguments From outrage]</ref><ref>[http://www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=45 Is Yahweh a Moral Monster? The New Atheists and Old Testament Ethics] by Paul Copan</ref>
 +
 +
=== Atheists and the ad hominem abusive logical fallacy ===
 +
[[File:PzMyers2.jpg|thumbnail|251px|right|The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of [[PZ Myers]] (pictured above), "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".<ref>[http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/piggliucci20150513 Reflections on the skeptic and atheist movements] By Massimo Pigliucci ''Scientia Salon'', Posted: May 13, 2015</ref>
 +
<br /><br />
 +
<small>(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/reuvenim/4426093513/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/deed.en  license agreement])</small>  ]]
 +
''See also:'' [[Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence|Atheism and social skills]] and [[Atheist factions]]
 +
 +
The [[Ad hominem|Ad Hominem]] Abusive, "also known as:  personal abuse, personal attacks, abusive fallacy, damning the source, name calling, needling [form of], refutation by character" is "attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making."<ref>[http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/10-ad-hominem-abusive Ad Hominem (Abusive)]</ref>
 +
 +
Atheists, particularly [[Militant atheism|militant atheists]]/anti-theists, have developed a reputation for bullying and engaging in profanity (See: [[Atheist bullying]] and [[Atheism and profanity]]).
 +
 +
In February of 2010, the news organization ''The Telegraph'' reported that the [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins|Richard Dawkins]] was "embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and 'frivolous gossip'."<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html Richard Dawkins in bitter web censorship row with fellow atheists: Professor Richard Dawkins is embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and “frivolous gossip], ''The Telegraph'' By Heidi Blake, 9:25AM GMT 26 Feb 2010</ref> Richard Dawkins [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|has a reputation for being abrasive]] so the behavior of his fans is not entirely surprising.
 +
 +
The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of the atheist [[PZ Myers]], "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".<ref>[http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/piggliucci20150513 Reflections on the skeptic and atheist movements] By Massimo Pigliucci ''Scientia Salon'', Posted: May 13, 2015</ref>
 +
 +
The University of Illinois psychologist Ryan Ritter published a study in the journal ''Social Psychological and Personality Science'' which showed among other things that atheists used profanity significantly more than Christians do on Twitter and that Christians had happier dispositions on Twitter.<ref>[http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/06/18/1948550613492345.full.pdf+html Happy Tweets: Christians Are Happier, More Socially Connected, and Less Analytical Than Atheists on Twitter Social Psychological and Personality Science 1948550613492345, first published on June 18, 2013]</ref>
 +
 +
Militant atheists/anti-atheists frequently accuse Christians of "lying for Jesus" despite the fact that historically atheists/evolutionists have frequently engaged in deception to promote their ideology (see: [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Atheist indoctrination]]). 
 +
 +
See also:
 +
 +
*[[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]]
 +
 +
*[[Evolutionary indoctrination]].
 +
 +
=== Scientism is self-refuting ===
 +
 +
''See also:'' [[List of atheist and agnostic pseudosciences]]
 +
 +
According to [[Discovery Institute]] [[scientism]] is an effort to use the methods of science to explain and control every part of human life, in other words, the misguided effort to apply science to areas outside its proper bounds.<ref name="Magician">{{cite web |title=The Magician's Twin: C. S. Lewis on Science, Scientism, and Society - Product Description|author=N/A |publisher=Discovery Institute Press |url=http://astore.amazon.com/discoveryinsti12-20/detail/1936599058 |accessdate= November 30, 2014 |quote=Beloved for his Narnian tales for children and his books of Christian apologetics for adults, best-selling author C.S. Lewis also was a prophetic critic of the growing power of scientism in modern society, the misguided effort to apply science to areas outside its proper bounds. In this wide-ranging book of essays, contemporary writers probe Lewis's warnings about the dehumanizing impact of scientism on ethics, politics, faith, reason, and science itself. Issues explored include Lewis's views on bioethics, eugenics, evolution, intelligent design, and what he called "scientocracy."}}</ref>
 +
 +
Scientism is self-refuting. [[William Lane Craig]] wrote: "Scientism tells us that we should not believe any proposition that cannot be scientifically proven. But what about that very proposition itself? It cannot itself be scientifically proven."<ref>[http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-scientism-self-refuting Is scientism self-refuting?]</ref> The Christian apologist Jason Peterson similarly wrote: "Science has to presuppose the validity of mathematics, the laws of logic, and that our senses are valid. Science is unable to prove any of those things." <ref>[Christianity and Circular Reasoning] by Jason Petersen at Answers for Hope Ministry</ref> See also: [[Atheism and naturalistic intelligence]]
 +
 +
[[C.S. Lewis]] was sceptical and highly critical of scientism as an ideology which in his view was confused with science and which tried to [[Reductionism|reduce]] everything that we can learn scientifically to materialistic blind undirected causes.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case against Scientism|publisher=DiscoveryInstitute|date= 18 Nov 2012|pages=02min:20sec|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPeyJvXU68k&list=PLF3F6DFC4CC901818|accessdate=27-April-2013}}</ref> He argued that scientism has the dehumanizing impact on [[ethics]], [[politics]], [[faith]], [[reason]], and science itself.<ref name="Magician"/>
 +
 +
=== Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy ===
 +
[[File:Shockofgod helmet.jpg|thumbnail|175px|right|Logo for the [[Shockofgod]] YouTube channel]]
 +
See also: [[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]] and [[Atheism has a lower retention rate compared to other worldviews]]
 +
 +
The [[no true Scotsman]] fallacy is a [[logical fallacy]] and more specifically a special case of [[circular logic]].  It involves dismissing any counterexamples.
 +
 +
==== Atheists claiming ex-atheists were never atheists ====
 +
 +
[[John W. Loftus]], one of the more prominent atheists in the atheist community. The [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]] Darrin Rasberry used to write for the atheist John Loftus’ blog site ''Debunking Christianity''.<ref>[https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/arguments-for-gods-existence-leads-former-christ-hater-darrin-rasberry-to-christ-follower/ Arguments for God’s existence leads former “Christ-hater,” Darrin Rasberry, to Christ follower] by James Bishop</ref> After Rasberry became a Christian Loftus said that Rasberry “was never an atheist in the first place.”<ref>[https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/arguments-for-gods-existence-leads-former-christ-hater-darrin-rasberry-to-christ-follower/ Arguments for God’s existence leads former “Christ-hater,” Darrin Rasberry, to Christ follower] by James Bishop</ref>
 +
 +
The popular Christian YouTube video creator [[Shockofgod]] is an ex-atheist who left atheism because it [[Rebuttals to atheist arguments|lacks proof]] and evidence that it is true, while Christianity offers an [[Christian apologetics websites|abundant amount]] of evidential support.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhr88HZtkmE Ex-atheist shares why he left the lie of Atheism]</ref> His YouTube videos have cumulatively received over 25 million  views since his YouTube channel's inception.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod</ref> Shockofgod won over 70 Christianity vs. [[atheism]] debates.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiGgOQ_aEvY Atheism loses a shocking 71 debates in a row]</ref>  There are atheists who claim that Shockofgod was never an atheist.<ref>
 +
*[http://www.pakistan.tv/videos-shockofgod-calls-into-atheist-radio-show-%5B7bBE1bos6JU%5D.cfm Shockofgod calls into Atheist Radio show - Hilarious! Part 1 Video]
 +
*[https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=ypO8qx9-5YA&lc=4KFJZ2armpynzsgytJFpDDS2iNJyXa1GFCN-U43FRa4 Shockofgod - "The Question That defeated The Atheist Show" - Debunked! by TheEducatedPrimate]
 +
*[http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=28091 Forum thread at an atheism forum] post by user Ajje
 +
</ref>
 +
 +
==== Atheists attempting to deny/minimize the roles of atheism/atheists in atheist atrocities ====
 +
 +
Atheist apologists commonly try to minimize or deny the role of atheism/atheists as far as atheist atrocites.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmrRC6zD4Zk Atheists Dodge Their History of Atrocities]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism]</ref><ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/04/mailvox-no-true-atheist-defense.html Mailvox: the "No True Atheist" defense]</ref>  It is as if no true atheist could be responsible for mass murder (see also: [[Atheism and Mass Murder|Atheism and mass murder]]).<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/04/mailvox-no-true-atheist-defense.html Mailvox: the "No True Atheist" defense]</ref>
 +
 +
Atheism was an integral tenet of Maxist-Lennism/[[Maoism|Maoist]]/[[Stalinism]] [[communism]] (see: [[Atheism and communism]]).
 +
 +
For more information, please see: [[Atheism and the no true Scotsman fallacy]]
 +
 +
==== Evolutionists who are atheists committing the no true Scottsman fallacy ====
 +
 +
''See also:'' [[Christianity and science]] and [[Atheism and the suppression of science]] and [[Creation science]]
 +
 +
[[Evolution]]ists who are atheists often claim that there are no real scientists who disbelieve evolution.<ref>[http://www.creationmoments.com/resources/blog/200902/many-scientists-do-not-accept-evolution Many Scientists Do Not Accept Evolution]</ref> In 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of [[Charles Darwin|Darwinian]] evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref> 
 +
 +
Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been [[Atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
 +
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
 +
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
 +
</ref>
 +
 +
 
== Atheists, family/societal origin of religious belief and the genetic fallacy ==
 
== Atheists, family/societal origin of religious belief and the genetic fallacy ==
 
[[File:Georgetown 2.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>]]
 
[[File:Georgetown 2.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|In 2012, a [[Georgetown University]] study was published indicating that only about 30 percent of those who grow up in an atheist household remain atheists as adults.<ref>http://www.christianpost.com/news/study-atheists-have-lowest-retention-rate-compared-to-religious-groups-78029/ Study: Atheists Have Lowest 'Retention Rate' Compared to Religious Groups</ref>]]
Conservative
Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,865

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/1158973"

Navigation menu