| Line 216: |
Line 216: |
| | | | |
| | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and cowardice]] and [[Atheism and Debate|Atheism and debate]] | | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and cowardice]] and [[Atheism and Debate|Atheism and debate]] |
| − | [[File:Vox Day.jpg|thumbnail|left|150px|Vox Day]] | + | [[File:Vox Day.jpg|thumbnail|left|150px|[[Vox Day]] ]] |
| | On September 4, 2011, [[Vox Day]] wrote concerning PZ Myers: | | On September 4, 2011, [[Vox Day]] wrote concerning PZ Myers: |
| | {{cquote|I have heard from numerous atheists who find his intellectual cowardice to be more than a little troubling given his usual tendency to create conflict rather than to avoid it. And he has handed an out to every single individual he ever hopes to challenge in the future. Why should they debate a nobody like him, a clown who isn't even a bigshot in his own field? | | {{cquote|I have heard from numerous atheists who find his intellectual cowardice to be more than a little troubling given his usual tendency to create conflict rather than to avoid it. And he has handed an out to every single individual he ever hopes to challenge in the future. Why should they debate a nobody like him, a clown who isn't even a bigshot in his own field? |
| Line 222: |
Line 222: |
| | As for the PZ Myers Memorial Debate, we are still in search of an atheist to champion the argument that the logic and evidence for the nonexistence of gods is stronger than the logic and evidence for the existence of gods. It is certainly informative to see how many atheists do not appear to believe they are able to effectively make this case; in light of this, many Christians may find this to be a useful tactical approach when confronted by aggressive atheists in the future. This tends to confirm my previous observations that while atheists like to challenge the beliefs of others, they are very ill-prepared, and in many cases downright unwilling, to defend their own. So, if you want to shut them up, simply go on the attack. They'll run away with alacrity.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/09/he-still-runs-like-girl.html Running, running by Vox Day]</ref>}} | | As for the PZ Myers Memorial Debate, we are still in search of an atheist to champion the argument that the logic and evidence for the nonexistence of gods is stronger than the logic and evidence for the existence of gods. It is certainly informative to see how many atheists do not appear to believe they are able to effectively make this case; in light of this, many Christians may find this to be a useful tactical approach when confronted by aggressive atheists in the future. This tends to confirm my previous observations that while atheists like to challenge the beliefs of others, they are very ill-prepared, and in many cases downright unwilling, to defend their own. So, if you want to shut them up, simply go on the attack. They'll run away with alacrity.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/09/he-still-runs-like-girl.html Running, running by Vox Day]</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | On August 28, 2011, Beale declared concerning Myers: | + | On August 28, 2011, Vox Day declared concerning Myers: |
| | {{cquote|What you clearly do not understand is that, by his own admission, PZ relies heavily upon emotional arguments rather than logical ones when he cannot simply appeal to an established scientific consensus. "I'll also cop to the obvious fact that, knowing that reason will not get through their skills, I'm happy to use emotional arguments as well. Passion is persuasive." His tendency to rely upon emotional rhetoric and passion rather than reason is precisely why he is afraid to debate people who rely primarily upon logic, because his ability to present reason-based arguments is relatively low. His ability to utilize reason is simply not equal to the skill of others who make use of it more effectively. PZ is without question an effective preacher to the godless choir of science fetishists, but he is remarkably unskilled at presenting convincing arguments, let alone conclusive ones, to those who do not already agree with him. Unlike you, he knows he is not an effective evangelist.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/08/can-one-dodge-dodger.html Can one dodge a dodger?]</ref>}} | | {{cquote|What you clearly do not understand is that, by his own admission, PZ relies heavily upon emotional arguments rather than logical ones when he cannot simply appeal to an established scientific consensus. "I'll also cop to the obvious fact that, knowing that reason will not get through their skills, I'm happy to use emotional arguments as well. Passion is persuasive." His tendency to rely upon emotional rhetoric and passion rather than reason is precisely why he is afraid to debate people who rely primarily upon logic, because his ability to present reason-based arguments is relatively low. His ability to utilize reason is simply not equal to the skill of others who make use of it more effectively. PZ is without question an effective preacher to the godless choir of science fetishists, but he is remarkably unskilled at presenting convincing arguments, let alone conclusive ones, to those who do not already agree with him. Unlike you, he knows he is not an effective evangelist.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/08/can-one-dodge-dodger.html Can one dodge a dodger?]</ref>}} |
| | | | |