Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 12 Sep 2002 17:12:08 -0700
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com>
Cc:        Lawrence Sica <lomifeh@earthlink.net>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Why did evolution fail?
Message-ID:  <3D812D58.D30609F1@mindspring.com>
References:  <20020912123152.B69462-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Neal E. Westfall" wrote:
[ ... ]
> > Would you quit pulling the word "random" out of your butt?
> > Thanks.
> 
> You are the one who tried to justify human reason by introducing
> randomness.  If you are dropping that belief, I won't talk about
> it anymore.

On the contrary; you are using your own assumptions to justify your
own conclusions.

The first use of the word "random" in this thread was in your
posting of 29 August 2002, as an adjective to describe your
*opinion* of a universe which did not attribute a continuing
requirement for uniformity (a requirement which you also pulled
out of thin air) to a creator.

Here is the reference:

<http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=478412+0+archive/2002/freebsd-chat/20020901.freebsd-chat>;


[ ... ]
> Well if this isn't the pot calling the kettle black!  You haven't
> done anything to show that my reasoning is fallacious other than
> lots of assertions and impugning my understanding.  Impugning
> someone's understanding is not a valid argument.  Until you can
> show that my reasoning is fallacious there is no basis for
> impugning my understanding at all.

You have appealed to authority.  You have appealed to a common
belief.  You have appealed to common practice.  You have appealed
to indirect consequences.  You've argued from the specific to the
general.  You've generalized.  You've demonstrated circular
reasoning.  You've proposed false dilemmas.  You've attempted to
create a burden of disproof.  You've engaged in post hoc reasoning.

All in all, you've committed most of the possible logical fallacies
in your arguments.

Mostly, your appeals have been to a common belief which is not, in
fact, shared by everyone else, which you then justify by appealing
to Biblical authority, which you justify by appealing to Divine
authority, which you justify by appealing to Biblical authority.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D812D58.D30609F1>