dianahsieh Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 By Paul Hsieh from NoodleFood,cross-posted by MetaBlog Can you spot the logical fallacy? (Taken while at a medical conference in Sarasota, FL, 12/9/2009.) Cross-posted from Metablog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dream_weaver Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Hmm, either 'chance is a choice', or could it be 'nothingness choosing', or even 'nothingness taking on a human attribute'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Not a fallacy, but an absurdity: God involves himself in trivial meaningless day-to-day events ("ZOMG my cat sneezed at the same time as me!"), but can't bother to save that bus full of kids from flying off that cliff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Ellison Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Petitio principii (begging the question). 'God is behind coincidences.' rests on the assumption that God is behind everything. That requires evidence, but none is presented. (I assume that the good father would not shy away from using his newfound conclusion as evidence of the existence of God as he defined it, thus making a circular argument) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 (edited) Another fallacy (or simply a contradiction) - an omniscient being that makes choices. Edited December 18, 2009 by brian0918 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philosopher Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Stolen concept? "Coincidence" presupposes there are things that happen for a reason and things that don't, and refers to one side of the divide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert J. Kolker Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 By Paul Hsieh from NoodleFood,cross-posted by MetaBlog Can you spot the logical fallacy? <a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog/uploaded_images/photo-750875.jpg"></a> (Taken while at a medical conference in Sarasota, FL, 12/9/2009.) Cross-posted from Metablog That is not a fallacy, which is a logically erroneous inference. It is an outright absurdity. A statement devoid of meaning. Bob Kolker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Not a fallacy, but an absurdity: God involves himself in trivial meaningless day-to-day events ("ZOMG my cat sneezed at the same time as me!"), but can't bother to save that bus full of kids from flying off that cliff. I agree.. more absurd than anything else. The statement on the sign is so nonsensical it make blood trickle from my ear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steckSalathe Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) Absolutely stupid, but wouldn't a coincidence (if god is behind them) be god showing himself? But yeah, a statement devoid of meaning lol. And sneezing is more important than the school bus of kids! Haha what a stupid god! Edited December 19, 2009 by steckSalathe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soth Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 When something appears as a coincidence, the sign tells us that god did it, but chose to remain anonymous. Therefor, when faced with what appears to be a coincidence, we can be sure that god did it - but then he did not remain anonymous - he is identified as the cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Ellison Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Stolen concept? "Coincidence" presupposes there are things that happen for a reason and things that don't, and refers to one side of the divide. It is, but I assume the speaker had that in mind and was making the point that there are no coincidences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kainscalia Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Soth got it, guys: An omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent being cannot be anonymous. Omnipresence implies that Man On The Cloud is behind everything- therefore anonymity is absolutely impossible. Sometimes the answer is right under your nose--- or wait, is that God? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyco Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 yeah if God was remaining anonymous about these coincidences, then how does the pastor know about it?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 I would agree with the previous posters that the sentence is meaningless, but I suppose its author thought it did have a certain meaning, and that it might induce some people to believe in God. But I can't figure out what this message is supposed to be. My best guess would be: "When things coincide in an unlikely way, it is in fact God that causes them to coincide, he just doesn't let us know he did it." If that's all it says, I don't see how this could make me believe in God if I don't already believe in him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) If that's all it says, I don't see how this could make me believe in God if I don't already believe in him. So the pastor's argument, which identifies without identification, convinces only the convinced. Edited December 19, 2009 by brian0918 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicsSon Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 How has Christian theology gone so low? How did they go from Pauls Epistle to the Romans, to bumper sticker catch phrases? Apparently quoting from the Bible just doesn't have the same effect it used to, lol. The phrase here seems to say: what man labels as mere coinsidence, is really the works of god unknown to him. So perhaps the logical fallacy is begging the question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
universehead Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 The "God" part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyco Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I suppose it's 'smuggled concept' "Stolen concept fallacy - (Smuggled concept) Using a concept to support an argument while denying a concept which the supporting concept logically depends on." The billboard is giving credit to God Credit logically depends on identity But the the concept of identity is negated by the concept of anonymity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freestyle Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 1.) "God" doesn't choose. He just knows, right? No choice is necessary. Plus, anything he is choosing over was something he created in the first place and "knows" all outcomes. 2.) "God" can't remain anonymous since many assume his hand in all matters from creation onward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.