The unofficial rules of religious debate...

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

Post Reply
User avatar
haas mark
Official SD.Net Insomniac
Posts: 16533
Joined: 2002-09-11 04:29pm
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
Contact:

The unofficial rules of religious debate...

Post by haas mark »

Enjoy. ;)
#1 The burden of proof is always on your opponent, even when it isn't.

#2 Your opponent is always somehow wrong, even when they're not.

#3 It is notoriously difficult to determine exactly what constitutes "proof." Exploit this relentlessly by claiming your opponent hasn't proved a thing.

#4 If your opponent appeals to authorities such as theologians, scientists, or philosophers it is never valid; if you do it then it is valid.

#5 When your opponent attacks you personally, it's always an ad hominem. If you do it, then it clearly isn't an ad hominem.

#6 Creation/Evolution is highly improbable, but here we are. Therefore Creation/Evolution must have happened.

#7 If you are a theist, you are free to claim that a god speaks directly to your mind or heart. If you are a nontheist, you are free to claim that theists who receive communication from a god must be suffering from a socially acceptable psychosis.

#8 If you are a theist, you are free to claim that nontheists do not have any morals or ethics. If you are a nontheist, you are free to bring Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Leprechauns, and Invisible Pink Unicorns into the debate at every opportunity.

#9 Your opponent's personal experiences are never valid; but your personal experiences are always valid.

#10 When your opponent makes an argument and you do not have a good counter-argument, you should force your opponent to define any terms that you think are sufficiently vague, preferably with an encyclopedia article or a 20 page definition. Repeat the process at your leisure.

#11 If you are a theist, you are free to claim that most people throughout history have believed in a god or gods; if you are a nontheist, you are free to retort that most people throughout history believed the sun revolved around the earth.

#12 When your opponent wants to make their beliefs public policy, it's always wrong. When you want to make your beliefs public policy, it's always right.

#13 Scientists who believe what your opponent believes are clearly wrong. Scientists who believe what you believe are clearly right.

#14 Argue relentlessly that your opponent is closed-minded, but that you are not.

#15 Your opponent did not come by their beliefs rationally. But of course you came by your beliefs rationally.

#16 If you are a theist, exploit the fact that nontheists can't explain how life arose from nonlife. If you are a nontheist, accuse the theist of appealing to a "god of the gaps."

#17 The fact that people have killed in the name of your beliefs does not disprove your beliefs. But people who killed in the name of your opponent's beliefs disproves your opponent's beliefs.

#18 Your opponent's scholars are always wrong. Your scholars are always right.

#19 When your opponent uses an argument that makes no sense to you, laugh at them and call them stupid; when you use an argument that makes no sense to your opponent, laugh at them and call them stupid.

#20 Your opponent is clearly nuts, but you are not.
Robert-Conway.com | lunar sun | TotalEnigma.net

Hot Pants à la Zaia | BotM Lord Monkey Mod OOK!
SDNC | WG | GDC | ACPATHNTDWATGODW | GALE | ISARMA | CotK: [mew]

Formerly verilon

R.I.P. Eddie Guerrero, 09 October 1967 - 13 November 2005


Image
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Humourous, but also a horribly obvious Golden Mean fallacy. To say that evolution is just as improbable as magical instantaneous transformation of clay to fully developed humanoid man betrays total ignorance of the process, not to mention basic logic.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
haas mark
Official SD.Net Insomniac
Posts: 16533
Joined: 2002-09-11 04:29pm
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
Contact:

Post by haas mark »

Darth Wong wrote:Humourous, but also a horribly obvious Golden Mean fallacy. To say that evolution is just as improbable as magical instantaneous transformation of clay to fully developed humanoid man betrays total ignorance of the process, not to mention basic logic.
True. This was just something I pulled off another board. Too many people (elsewhere, of course) use these all for it not to be enjoyed here. :P
Robert-Conway.com | lunar sun | TotalEnigma.net

Hot Pants à la Zaia | BotM Lord Monkey Mod OOK!
SDNC | WG | GDC | ACPATHNTDWATGODW | GALE | ISARMA | CotK: [mew]

Formerly verilon

R.I.P. Eddie Guerrero, 09 October 1967 - 13 November 2005


Image
User avatar
EmperorMing
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3432
Joined: 2002-09-09 05:08am
Location: The Lizard Lounge

Post by EmperorMing »

Too funny and too true!
Image

DILLIGAF: Does It Look Like I Give A Fuck

Kill your God!
User avatar
Peregrin Toker
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8609
Joined: 2002-07-04 10:57am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: The unofficial rules of religious debate...

Post by Peregrin Toker »

verilon wrote: #2 Your opponent is always somehow wrong, even when they're not.

#5 When your opponent attacks you personally, it's always an ad hominem. If you do it, then it clearly isn't an ad hominem.

#9 Your opponent's personal experiences are never valid; but your personal experiences are always valid.

#10 When your opponent makes an argument and you do not have a good counter-argument, you should force your opponent to define any terms that you think are sufficiently vague, preferably with an encyclopedia article or a 20 page definition. Repeat the process at your leisure.

#13 Scientists who believe what your opponent believes are clearly wrong. Scientists who believe what you believe are clearly right.

#14 Argue relentlessly that your opponent is closed-minded, but that you are not.

#15 Your opponent did not come by their beliefs rationally. But of course you came by your beliefs rationally.

#18 Your opponent's scholars are always wrong. Your scholars are always right.

#19 When your opponent uses an argument that makes no sense to you, laugh at them and call them stupid; when you use an argument that makes no sense to your opponent, laugh at them and call them stupid.

#20 Your opponent is clearly nuts, but you are not.
I say that all of these apply to political debate as well.
"Hi there, would you like to have a cookie?"

"No, actually I would HATE to have a cookie, you vapid waste of inedible flesh!"
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18684
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

Post by Rogue 9 »

Let me guess. Its off to NucleusWeb for these next, right? :lol:
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
Post Reply