A few years ago I started blogging about Christianity because I felt I had something worthwhile to say. I said what I had to say, in a couple of blogs, and then I stopped blogging to focus on my book The Christianity Myth. Trying to promote this book has forced me back into the melee of social media and re-vitalized my interests in blogging.
I have to say that I am appalled at some of the crap posted on social media sites, both by theists and by so called atheists, all of whom are obviously full of the omnipotence of ignorance, and show no signs of wanting to educate themselves.
Getting through to people who don’t want to know, be they theists or atheists, is extremely difficult at the best of times. I think John Loftus summed up part of the problem when he said “You can’t expect to argue people out of their religion, because they were never argued into it in the first place”.
The world is gradually becoming more secular with each generation, largely because the internet has blown away the need to remain ignorant of the facts. The following post by Jerome is a great opportunity for both theists and atheists to let some light into their dark and prejudiced worlds.
Maybe debating and argumentative writing is just not for me
Jerome •#atheism •August 12, 2015
I was never good at debating anyway.
Lately I’ve been wasting a lot of time with online debating of theists (as well as writing more in-depth argumentative pieces here) and finding it all very frustrating. In the last two days alone I’ve seen two variants of the argument from first cause – one of which concluded that Allah is the first cause – and three flavours of Pascal’s Wager. I’ve also seen many really stupid non sequiturs, slippery slopes, arguments from morality, cherry-picking, circular reasoning, and of course that old chestnut, the argument from ignorance. Two different Islam apologists found ways of reinterpreting the Qur’an such that clay is allegorical for sperm and the folding of cloth is somehow allegorical for the creation of space and time.
I write arguments against the common ones here because I’m passionate about critical thinking, logic and reason; but it’s annoying… Debunking just one brain-dead fallacious clause properly takes an essay of several hundred words, or maybe over 1000 like yesterday (when I got carried away), and for what? It changes nobody’s mind. Those people just carry on believing in bullshit, and writing their nonsense that justifies it in their minds, yet leaves the interesting part unstated – their cognitive dissonance that explains why the nonsense is enough to make sense to them. And such fallacies take seconds for the person to write, or more likely to copy and paste
Click here to return to main blog