The Incoherence of the Accusers (5)


Some who object to religious beliefs say they are a product of where we were born. What’s curious about this objection is not that it’s not true, but that it’s said in such a manner as if the teller was not affected by it. However, the statement contains the seeds of the teller’s demise too. For if it is true, the atheist who employs this argument in the service of atheism is trying to convince you to be one because he was born this way. The only force this argument contains is in the mistake of the hearer who thinks the man telling him this has somehow escaped the clutches of the argument. But, the chains of the argument cannot be broken, or its force is lost. So, why should the bias of one man’s birth be more important than the bias of another man’s birth?

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “The Incoherence of the Accusers (5)

  1. Some who object to religious beliefs say they are a product of where we were born. What’s curious about this objection is not that it’s not true,…

    So you are saying that it is true?

    …but that it’s said in such a manner as if the teller was not affected by it.

    Tu Quoque

    However, the statement contains the seeds of the teller’s demise too.

    No, there is no “demise”.
    Wealth is connected to geography. Political beliefs are connected to geography. Education and fashion sense and language are connected to geography.
    All sorts of things (human things) are connected to geography.

    That includes…religion.
    Belief in any magical, invisible [brand name] seems to be curiously limited by geography.
    That goes for any religion.
    They all work the same.

    For if it is true…

    Well, is it true or is it not?

    … the atheist who employs this argument in the service of atheism is trying to convince you to be one because he was born this way.

    Oh is that what the mystery atheist is doing?
    Well, whodathunk.
    Strawman.

    The only force this argument contains is in the mistake of the hearer who thinks the man telling him this has somehow escaped the clutches of the argument.

    Tu Quoque.

    Instead of making stuff up out of straw, try and embrace reality.
    There are plenty of atheists on Youtube.
    Quote them.

    Raising Consciousness (1/2) – Richard Dawkins @ UC Berkeley

    1. If the argument from geography is true, then there’s no reason to think those who reject the religious environment are any different; and we’re all just reacting to our environments, whatever the result. After all, the Christian environment produces a myriad of outcomes; as does the secular environment.

  2. It would be a fallacy if I used the hypocrisy to say Atheism is wrong. I didn’t do that. It’s not a fallacy to point out dishonesty.

    So it’s dishonest but not wrong?
    Ah, right. Sure.

    If the argument from geography is true…

    Well, is it?

    …then there’s no reason to think those who reject the religious environment are any different; and we’re all just reacting to our environments, whatever the result.

    Tu Quoque.
    Your religion is a product of your geography.
    It’s no accident that you don’t happen to be a Hindu.

    After all, the Christian environment produces a myriad of outcomes; as does the secular environment.

    You are ignoring the obvious. Your religion is geography-based.
    All religions are geography based.
    That’s the point.
    There’s nothing special about your religion.
    It works the same as all the others.
    Your geography comes first. Then your belief.

    After all, the Hindu environment produces a myriad of outcomes; as does the secular environment.

    So how many Wiccans pop up in a Hindu environment as opposed to Hindus?

    After all, the Muslim environment produces a myriad of outcomes; as does the secular environment.

    So how many Thorists pop up in a Muslim environment as opposed to Muslims?

    After all, the Taoist environment produces a myriad of outcomes; as does the secular environment.

    So how many Rastafarians pop up in a Taoist environment as opposed to Taoists?

    Look at yourself and ask why you ended up in the Christian faith.
    Out of all the thousands and thousands of possible religions past and present, you became a Christian.
    With a specific denomination, no less.

    Now look around you at your environment (past and present) and connect the dots.

    1. Are you just trying to embody the people I talk about in my post? You’re doing the same thing I talked about. You’re being careful not to let the argument point in your direction.

  3. You’re being careful not to let the argument point in your direction.

    Tu quoque.

    Some who object to religious beliefs say they are a product of where we were born.

    Even those with religious beliefs seem to tacitly realize that their particular brand name faith is a product of where they were born.

    You are not Hindu.
    You are an atheist with regards to Hinduism.

    You are not Muslim.
    You are an atheist with regards to Islam.

    You are not a Wiccan.
    You are an atheist with regards to Wicca.

    There is nothing profound about how you became a Christian.
    It’s just an accident of geography.

    That warm and runny feeling you get deep down inside knowing (just knowing) that you have the right [brand name] is based upon the place where you were born.

    No magical, invisible friend way up in the sky is required.

    “We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. ” —Richard Dawkins

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s