Because It’s TrueA few posts back, in the context of Harrisian determinism / Galen Strawson’s Basic Argument, I asked:
Why embrace a worldview that necessarily commits one to a full abdication of ultimate moral responsibility, especially when it’s a philosophical position with no scientific grounding?
In a very long response, a commenter going by ThatGuyWithHippyHair (hereafter “ThatGuy”) replied:
False Argument #34: John W. Loftus On Mind/BrainA while back, I asked:
…shouldn’t an atheist limit themselves to belief in brains only?
John W. Loftus took a stab, and here’s what he concluded:
False Argument #18: Personal Anecdotes = Empirical Evidence, or I Believe Mother Teresa, Not George BushPlease, somebody help me determine that I am not crazy, mentally deficient, or possibly worse. I've now heard the following argument in the blogoshpere two times, and I immediately pegged it as a fallacious case of special pleading with absolutely zero bearing in logic whatsoever.
What do you think? Here's the argument, from a website titled, Why I Hate Jesus:
False Argument #12: Atheism Is Scientifically TenableIt's often easy to spot faulty reasoning in somebody else's belief system, but how many of us rigorously apply equal scrutiny to our own cherished worldview?
The failure to do so is known as special pleading and I was recently accused of this intellectual atrocity by a good friend of mine while discussing the movie Zeitgeist. After weeks of hearing nothing but hype and praise about this film I'd love to tell you how disappointed I was with it, but now is not the time and you're more than welcomed to read the review. All you need to know for our dialog here is that the opening segments show in quick succession visual images depicting the epic problems of humanity, asking what could possibly be their cause.