Monday, July 14, 2014
In a debate, everyone wants to claim they have reason on their side, often to the exclusion of their debate opponent. Atheists have even gone so far as to hold a "Reason Rally" in the name of atheism. In this regard, here at The Cumulative Case, we've been examining some logical blunders of leading proponents of atheism. In our last post, we discussed how Bart Ehrman's claim about miracles (that they are, by definition, "always the least probable explanation for what happened") equates to the presupposition that the probability of a miracle is zero, which is blind faith of the worst kind. Does he make any other logical blunders in his position on God and miracles? The answer is yes, and there are many.
Friday, July 11, 2014
Circular logic: that's what happens when you arrive at a conclusion only because you assumed it was true from the start. Last time, I highlighted a particular claim by Richard Dawkins that showed his faulty reasoning through circular logic. This time, we'll look at a quote from Bart Ehrman.
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
In line with our most recent post here at The Cumulative Case, which exposes Richard Dawkins' circular reasoning, there is a nice post from the Two Books Approach that discusses the same idea. Below is the relevant excerpt from that post (But math-o-phobes beware: there is a dose of Bayesian inference!). Enjoy!
Monday, July 7, 2014
I have recently noticed atheists making a lot of claims that are not based on reason, but on their own philosophical presuppositions. Problem is, this is circular reasoning. Over the next series of posts, we'll take a look at a few of these claims; today, we'll focus on a claim by Richard Dawkins.