Re: The Argument Against Arguing Against Religion
Questioner, forgive me for this please.... but....
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaa hahahahahaha!
Ok, I had to get that out. I think this is incredibly funny. The title alone is quite entertaining... Not laughing at you, I promise, this one just hit's my funnybone is all...
Ok moving on. You know I just just can't help myself from bringing this up because I hear so many people sling these terms around.
Fact...
Logic...
Evidence...
Words are something of great interest to me because often times there is a whole range of meanings for ONE word. So depending
how you say what you say really determines what you are saying. So let's talk about facts, evidence, and logic since you say:
Quote:...most of those professing belief in a religion do so without any real factual evidence dictates that they will not relent their belief due to fact or logic.
(Hang on to your office chairs everyone... I'm getting ready to assert something here! whoooo hoooooooo!)
Fact
1 : a thing done: as a obsolete : FEAT b : CRIME <accessory after the fact> c archaic : ACTION
2 archaic : PERFORMANCE, DOING
3 : the quality of being actual : ACTUALITY <a question of fact hinges on evidence>
4 a : something that has actual existence <space exploration is now a fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
5 : a piece of information presented as having objective reality
- in fact : in truth
So to the believer God is considered a fact based on objective reality...
To the non-believer God is not considered a fact based on belief that there was never an actual occurance of the things the bible says and there's no physical proof of His existence.
Logic
1 a
(1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning
(2) : a branch or variety of logic <modal logic> <Boolean logic>
(3) : a branch of semiotic; especially : SYNTACTICS
(4) : the formal principles of a branch of knowledge b
(1) : a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty
(2) : RELEVANCE, PROPRIETY c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable d : the arrangement of circuit elements (as in a computer) needed for computation; also : the circuits themselves
2 : something that forces a decision apart from or in opposition to reason <the logic of war>
- lo·gi·cian /lO-'ji-sh&n/ noun
To the believer God is a logical explanation because to themselves their reasoning is valid because they believe what the bible says is true therefore providing evidence to them of a sequence of facts and events seen as inevitable and/or predictable.
To the non-believer God is not a logical explanation because the believers reasoning is faulty since there is not a science within it that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration
Evidence:
: to offer evidence of : PROVE, EVINCE
Now, based on all that's been said above:
To the believer there is
evidence of God because their
facts are based on objective reality and their
logic comes from the bible.
To the non-believer there is no
evidence of God because the things the bible contains are not considered
facts nor is there
logic because there's no demonstration of His existence.
So my assertions is this:
What is fact to me may not be fact to you:
Does that then make it any less a fact?
What is logic to me may not be logic to you:
Does that then make it any less logical?
What is evidence to me may not be evidence to you:
Does that then make it any less evidence?
