The n00bs guide to debating fundies! Part one: Logical Fallacies

The first of a series of how to debate fundies.
Please subscribe so you don't miss part 2!

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• noob
• n00b
• n00bz
• debate
• debating
• fundy
• fundies
• fallacy
• logical
• fallacies
• religion
• god
• jesus
• christ
• church
• atheist
• atheism
• agnostic
• secular
• prodigy
• voodoo
• people
• bush
• obama
• hussein

[ScabeiathraxUK]

@casanovakreg Naming a couple of nonsensical paradoxes doesn't make all arguments circular. Example: You: "The sky is green!" Me: "No, it isn't." You: "Yes, it is." Me: *points at the sky* Me: "No, it isn't" You: "Okay!" See, that was a real, unparadoxical example of an argument. Almost all arguments are like that, more or less. "...prove induction..." You can't, because the method to prove induction *is* using induction. How can you prove anything without the proof?

[casanovakreg]

isn't every argument ultimately circular? How do you prove induction without using induction? How do you justify communication without using it? I don't know. I like learnlogicalfallacies

[fractal420]

@matur1n

Aren't you ready to move past this and begin discussing your religious beliefs?

[boorens18]

@Matur1n k so according to you, if u insult someone....you automatically have no logic behind your position....regardless of whether or not u address their points....doesnt matter. Sorry but I dont take advice on how to argue from a person who cant tell the difference between an ad hominem and an insult

[Matur1n]

"Quite frankly ...an insult is the only thing someone will respond to. "

In a word "no". If you are going to stoop to hurl insults you might as well waive a flag admitting your logic isn't convincing. Frankly, the people on YT who do the most insults are those who come out with what they think is a brilliant statement, only to have someone completely destroy it with logic. That is who you are grouping yourself with when you abandon logic for insults. When you do it in your opening title ...

[boorens18]

@Matur1n Quite frankly, if you address arguments logically...and they still refuse to face it, then sometimes an insult is the only thing someone will respond to. Why respect someones position if they refuse to admit possibly being wrong? Such as fundamentalists, who brag of perfect knowledge from god. By definition, they cant ever admit anything is wrong in it. So if you are trying to argue that no one should ever be ridiculed for their position, you are sheltering the ridiculous.

[Matur1n]

Even if it is only an intentional insult, that is just as problematic for someone doing a video that advocates elevating YT arguments to a more logical basis.

You are wrong about ad hominem's having to be in a response . In a debate, the speaker going 1st can still use an ad hominem against the other debater by anticipating future arguments. That is exactly what occurs here. It implies we should not listen to fundamentalists because of who they are, not addressing their arguments themselves.

[boorens18]

@Matur1n again no...you dont seem to really understand the difference between an ad hominem and an insult. There IS a difference. The title for one, is not an argument against fundies, nor is the title itself the response...so how could it be a logical fallacy?

An ad hominem attempting to acomplish one of those goals otherwise its just an insult. Insults are going to happen get use to it, then get on topic.

[Matur1n]

The title itself is an ad hominem. It doesn't do you any good to try to make a case that it is simply trying to be intentionally insulting or pejorative. That is just as bad for someone who is doing a video pleading for us to argue with logic.

[boorens18]

@Matur1n give me the line that specifically is an ad hominem