Re: Physics and metaphysics

From: Atheistagnostic (atheistagnostic_at_nospam.net)
Date: 03/11/05 

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:37:14 -0800

Virgil wrote:

> In article <OI-dnWagE_VVHK3fRVn-3A@comcast.com>,
> Atheistagnostic <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Virgil wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <homdnf6okuugS7LfRVn-1Q@comcast.com>,
>>> "Atheistagnostic" <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:ITSnetNOTcom%23virgil-B29084.20345209032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Because saying that we do not know that a thing cannot be is not
>>>>>"championing" it.
>>>>
>>>>Yes it is.
>>>
>>>
>>>Championing the existence of a god means saying that one actually
>>>exists.
>>
>>Your argument _ad ignorantiam_ for God is that there might be a magic
>>invisible God anyway
>
>
>
> I have never made any such argument.

Now you are just flat out lying.

Your argument _ad ignorantiam_ for God is that there might be a magic
invisible God anyway, even though you cannot produce any logically
satisfactory evidence of any such thing, and this hypothesis (this
speculative, 'might be' imagining) even a genius like Galileo could not
prove false! It's right out of the textbook:

<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued
against Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and
valleys, the moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent
irregularities are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. And
this hypothesis, which saves the perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo
could not prove false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)

[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means a speculative, 'might be'
imagining with no basis in fact.]

Tell the truth now, Virgil, is there anything in evidence you can point to
and say, 'That's what I'm talking about, there is GodŽ'?

No sir, you cannot, all you can do is argue that there might be a GodŽ
anyway, even though there is no such thing in evidence you can point to.

Then you try to shift the burden of proof to the non-believers by arguing
that there is no proof your hypothesis is false. That is a textbook case of
logical fallacy, sir. See Copi.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The ID ONLY Hypothesis
    ... There you go again, arguing _ad ignorantiam_, which is logical fallacy for ... mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope. ... Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the ... are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Physics and metaphysics
    ... Your argument _ad ignorantiam_ for God is that there might be a magic ... criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the ... mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Physics and metaphysics
    ... You are arguing _ad ignorantiam_ that your ad hoc hypothetically ... invisible God is an hypothesis even a genius like Galileo could not prove ... Then you try to shift the burden of proof to the non-believers by arguing ...
    (sci.physics)