http://www.evangelism.net/logic-the-fallacy-called-appeal-to-ignorance.htm Equipping You to Share the Gospel Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:17:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 http://www.evangelism.net/logic-the-fallacy-called-appeal-to-ignorance.htm/comment-page-1#comment-4014 AJ Rinaldi Wed, 05 Aug 2009 22:01:58 +0000 http://evangelism.net/?p=269#comment-4014 Good point Todd—Thank you for the comment! The point of this series was to address the fact that the atheistic-neo Darwin/ evolutionists couch their debate as being strictly along a rational and logical path. We often hear about how their “science” is based on observation and not assumption. However, the fact is that their arguments are just as subjective and emotional as those who have religious convictions. You are correct in stating that a faith-based worldview would have to admit to some logical fallacies. However, although authentic Christianity (given a historical biblical perspective) is a rational faith, it is just that---faith. Hope in things not seen. The contrast is that ‘militant’ atheists (which it sounds as if you are not among that world-view) claim to be all logic and yet more often than not are illogical and irrational when attacking anyone who disagrees with them. It doesn’t take much reading of their blogs to observe this. To me, that is a big red flag because their defensiveness betrays weaknesses in their positions. In addition, theirs is a belief system as well—hope in things not seen, as evolution (macro) cannot be observed or repeated and is therefore still a theory---for them a religion. Otherwise, why would they be so vociferous in their attacks? Concerning the evidence for evolution vs. the evidence for God—I would invite you to consider reading some resources such as any book by Lee Strobel, the work of Probe Ministries (in particular the DVD “Redeeming Darwin” and the book Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell). Also—read the science; there is virtually no “evidence” of evolution---it is all theoretical. If you haven’t seen Expelled yet—go rent it. Thanks again for the comment! AJR Good point Todd—Thank you for the comment! The point of this series was to address the fact that the atheistic-neo Darwin/ evolutionists couch their debate as being strictly along a rational and logical path. We often hear about how their “science” is based on observation and not assumption. However, the fact is that their arguments are just as subjective and emotional as those who have religious convictions. You are correct in stating that a faith-based worldview would have to admit to some logical fallacies. However, although authentic Christianity (given a historical biblical perspective) is a rational faith, it is just that—faith. Hope in things not seen. The contrast is that ‘militant’ atheists (which it sounds as if you are not among that world-view) claim to be all logic and yet more often than not are illogical and irrational when attacking anyone who disagrees with them. It doesn’t take much reading of their blogs to observe this. To me, that is a big red flag because their defensiveness betrays weaknesses in their positions. In addition, theirs is a belief system as well—hope in things not seen, as evolution (macro) cannot be observed or repeated and is therefore still a theory—for them a religion. Otherwise, why would they be so vociferous in their attacks? Concerning the evidence for evolution vs. the evidence for God—I would invite you to consider reading some resources such as any book by Lee Strobel, the work of Probe Ministries (in particular the DVD “Redeeming Darwin” and the book Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell). Also—read the science; there is virtually no “evidence” of evolution—it is all theoretical. If you haven’t seen Expelled yet—go rent it. Thanks again for the comment! AJR

]]> http://www.evangelism.net/logic-the-fallacy-called-appeal-to-ignorance.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2154 Todd Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:38:27 +0000 http://evangelism.net/?p=269#comment-2154 I am not associated with any religion, but nor would I consider myself to be an athiest. I'm not arguing the side of either really, but surely the fallacy you call "appeal to ignorance" applies just as much to religion as it does to science or evolution? I mean, there is not enough evidence to prove that any God exists for certain, but as there is not enough evidence to disprove either then He must? It's exactly the same argument that you were critising science for using, completely aside from the fact that there appears, at first glance, to be far more evidence for evolution than for God. I am not associated with any religion, but nor would I consider myself to be an athiest.
I’m not arguing the side of either really, but surely the fallacy you call “appeal to ignorance” applies just as much to religion as it does to science or evolution? I mean, there is not enough evidence to prove that any God exists for certain, but as there is not enough evidence to disprove either then He must? It’s exactly the same argument that you were critising science for using, completely aside from the fact that there appears, at first glance, to be far more evidence for evolution than for God.

]]>