June, 2011

Complex Question

This is the interrogative form of begging the question. This is when a question contains an unproved assumption. For example: “Do you still beat your wife?“. A complex question should really be divided into separate questions (1) “Did you even beat your wife?” (2) “If so, do you still continue to do so?“. This is why the question is complex. The evolutionist...

Read More

Question-Begging epithet

Subcategory of the Fallacies of Presumptions This is when someone imports biased (and often emotional) language to support a conclusion that is logically unproved. The idea is to persuade someone using biased language rather than logic. Watch out for words such as “ignorant”, “arrogant”, “dishonest”, “stupid”, “gullible”...

Read More

Relativism

This is the belief that truth is “relative“. That it varies from person to person. Relativism includes the idea that there are no absolutes. But the proposition that “there are no absolutes” is itself an absolute proposition. Relativists assert that it is absolutely true that truth is not absolute. This is a self-defeating philosophy. If relativism were absolutely true,...

Read More

Rational thinking

If evolution were true, there wouldn’t be any rational reason to believe it! If life is the result of evolution, then it means that an evolutionist’s brain is simply the outworking of millions of years of random-chance processes. The brain would simply be a collection of chemical reactions that have been preserved because they had some sort of survival values in the past. If...

Read More

Reductio ad absurdum

“reducing to absurdity“. In this type of consistency a principle taken to its logical conclusion will yield an absurd result. Evolutionists will want to take a philosophy only so far, and then inconsistently switch to another. For example, using this principle (Reductio ad absurdum), you can refute empiricism. By this standard to it’s logical conclusion, we would eventually...

Read More