Comments on: The Logic is Impeccable

By: Richard Wade

Richard Wade — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:35:00 +0000

Don’t worry Xeonicus, there are soooo many opportunities. I’ve made the same remarks several times. You’ll get many chances to beat me to the punch.

By: Skylar

Skylar — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:15:05 +0000

Seriously, it would have been much easier for the theist to say, “God gave us morals and our peer pressure gave you morals indirectly.”

By: cipher

cipher — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 00:12:02 +0000

those who operate at Kohlberg’s lowest level, minding their manners only under the threat of punishment from the Sky Policeman have difficulty comprehending any higher orientation for moral behavior.

Absolutely! The reason they can’t comprehend moral behavior without threat of punishment is because they are the kind of people who would behave immorally without threat of punishment.

By: Xeonicus

Xeonicus — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:40:30 +0000

Ahh, Richard beat me to the punch on Kohlberg. I was going to post the same thing.

By: Matt Stone

Matt Stone — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:58:45 +0000

I thought this was satire till I read the first line again.
Maybe you should shoot him.

By: Katie

Katie — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:37:03 +0000

I am as freaked out by people who won’t do something simply because “God told them not to” as I am by people who won’t do something simply because it is illegal.

Most don’t seem to realize, and perhaps this is why we need laws in the first place, that laws are enacted because they are self-evident. There wasn’t a big debate over whether or not murder should be legal, it’s a pretty cut and dry topic. Rather, we made it illegal so that we could establish ways of dealing with muderers, and to work out details like self-defense, crimes of passion, etc.

“Theist” fails at basic logic. what he says is.

A: I believe in God.
B. I am moral.
C. Ergo, you need to believe in God to be moral (conclusion without premise)

D. You do not believe in God.
D and C (invalid premise) ergo E: You are immoral (conclusion without premise)

F: God prevents immoral behavior. (conclusion without premise)
F, ergo G: You are incapable of immoral behavior (conclusion without premise, also conflicts with E, and therefore D, assuming C, which is also invalid)

It just fails on so many points it’s not even worth my eloquent derision. ^^

– Katie

By: Drew

Drew — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:12:33 +0000

Um … wow.

If George Carlin relayed that story with only the embellishment of his vocal inflection, it would be a good joke.

I’m a man.
To be a man you have to be married.
I’m not married.
Then you are not a man.
But my anatomy is definitely male.
Then you must be gay.
But I am attracted to women.
Then you are a lesbian posing as a man.

Rock on!

By: Alexandre

Alexandre — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:53:28 +0000

Trying to mix his belief with our logic and putting it in the same context. Dumbest of all kinds for thinking he’s smart.

By: Richard Wade

Richard Wade — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:22:01 +0000

Theists' assumptions about how people would behave without God in their lives reveal nothing about God, nothing about people, but much about themselves. They base their assumptions using themselves as the reference. Not all of them do, but those who operate at Kohlberg's lowest level, minding their manners only under the threat of punishment from the Sky Policeman have difficulty comprehending any higher orientation for moral behavior.

By: Evolved Rationalist

Evolved Rationalist — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:09:42 +0000

Good. One less theistard contaminating the gene pool.

Oh…wait…