Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
3,026
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 20:
Line 20: +
→Examples: another example w/r/t Jimmy Kimmel
*An adherent of a non-[[Christian]] religion might criticize Christianity on the basis of alleged difficulties in the [[Bible]], while explaining away difficulties of at least the same level in his own religion's holy book by saying that his own holy book needs to be "interpreted correctly." Without adequate justification for applying different rules of interpretation to the two texts, that person engages in special pleading.
*An adherent of a non-[[Christian]] religion might criticize Christianity on the basis of alleged difficulties in the [[Bible]], while explaining away difficulties of at least the same level in his own religion's holy book by saying that his own holy book needs to be "interpreted correctly." Without adequate justification for applying different rules of interpretation to the two texts, that person engages in special pleading.
*An [[atheist]] might argue that a Creator needs a Creator, who needs a Creator, [[infinite regression|and so on]], whereas the universe can simply exist. Without an adequate reason why the universe can simply exist, while [[God]] cannot, he engages in special pleading.
*An [[atheist]] might argue that a Creator needs a Creator, who needs a Creator, [[infinite regression|and so on]], whereas the universe can simply exist. Without an adequate reason why the universe can simply exist, while [[God]] cannot, he engages in special pleading.
*Liberals hold conservatives to stringent purity tests but exempt other liberals, such as Jimmy Kimmel.
== What Special Pleading Is Not ==
== What Special Pleading Is Not ==