Logic | The Armchair Antichrist

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Fortress of Faith

On May 6, 2010, In Evolution, Religion, Science, By The Armchair Antichrist

I don’t watch House and never plan on watching it, but Gregory House made a superb quote on the show. This gem of a quote is “if you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people”. It’s not that I think all religious people are inherently stupid or illogical, but that there is fundamentally within them a core part of them that does not respond to reason. This core consists of religious beliefs which are garrisoned in a region of their mind unassailable by any intrusion of reason or logic. These are beliefs which they can never let go in spite of piles and piles of evidence to the contrary. This is the work of faith.

However, sometimes reason and logic make a breakthrough. A small chunk of this fortress of faith is chipped away. There is the feeling that maybe what I believe is not 100% true. As a result, cognitive dissonance can occur which is the uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. For example, there is the dilemma in accepting evolution as an accurate explanation of the diversity of life on the planet and the belief that God created all of life uniquely. To get rid of this mental unease some sort of conflict resolution must be made.

For some the acceptance of evolution for example might progress into disbelief in God. For others it may result in abandoning evolution altogether and the strengthening of faith in God. And for others yet more there may be a more harmonious compromise. With the example of evolution I used earlier it may be the compromised belief that evolution was the mechanism which God used to exercise his will.

I am most in favour of the first type of resolution, obviously. But, the third one is still much more preferable than the second. At least in that case reason can reach their core. In fact, for those who can come to such a compromise there probably isn’t this impenetrable fortress of faith I have been talking about. They may one day become atheists too. But, I don’t really care if that happens. My wish is not for everybody in the world to become staunch, militant atheists. Rather, it is for people to become more logical and more willing to see things less absolutely.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: belief • cognitive • contradictory • dissonance • Evolution • god • gregory • house • logic • reason • religious

An Unlikely Convert

On April 1, 2010, In Anecdotes, Poems, By The Armchair Antichrist

I have finally found faith. It took a while, but I could no longer live in despair. I have always had this empty feeling, a yearning for more. This nihilism of values was eating away at me. And I wanted to feel complete. I wanted peace. Peace for my lacking soul.

I once thought that everything could be explained by reason and logic. I was wrong. There are some questions whose answers lie beyond this world. I came to this revelation when I found Jesus, or rather Jesus found me.

He spoke to me at 3:00AM a few nights back when I was finishing up two of my philosophy essays. My eyes were near bloodshot from staring at my computer screen for hours. But, I could see clearly. There was something wrong. The words from my essay were swirling around, blinking and flashing. Soon, they came together to form a pattern.

It started out as a picture of a baby. But, then it became animated and showed a progression of scenes of a boy growing up. I soon realized that this was me. As the animation progressed to the present Jesus came onto the screen. He told me that he has known me before I was born. In addition, he explained how the mental capacities I was designed with would prevent me from coming to faith on my own so that it was His duty to share His love with me personally.

He told me that He loved me and wanted to give everything He could offer me, but that only I could make the decision to receive it. To help me with my decision He showed me what my life would be if I accepted Him and what my life would be if I did not. The first animation was of a long and happy life with my future family and eventual ascension to heaven with Him. The other one was much different. It was as of an equally long, but very unhappy life with me living alone and later in a dark place in complete separation from Him. By then the decision was clear.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: christ • faith • heaven • jesus • logic • nihilism • peace • Philosophy • reason • soul

Deny God to Cope with Reality?

On March 10, 2010, In Heaven and Hell, Religious Arguments, Religious Stupidity, By The Armchair Antichrist

Have you seen this before?

Atheists try to make belief in God seem like something just to help people cope, but it is the exact opposite! They deny God to help them cope with the coming judgment.

You can find it on a number of Christian YouTube profiles. I don’t know why it is so popular because it is just so damn idiotic. It rings of the same bell as Satan going against God even though he knows that he exists and will destroy him. Similarly, this concept assumes that atheists believe in God and know that they will burn in hell for eternity for denying God.

This doesn’t make any sense firstly because by definition an atheist does not believe in God. Furthermore, it assumes that people with the knowledge that there are only two paths: one that leads to eternal life and happiness and another that leads to eternal suffering and damnation that people would actually choose the latter.

There is no amount of sin that you religious people think atheists enjoy so much that can persuade us to choose hell. And implying that people choose to go to hell is just disgusting. So, religious people please get your concepts straight and try using some logic and reason before spouting out nonsense.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: atheist • christian • damnation • eternal • god • judgment • logic • reason • religious • satan • suffering • youtube

Purposeful Anger

On February 24, 2010, In Christianity, Religious Stupidity, By The Armchair Antichrist

How dare you judge atheists for being angry. We are angry for damn good reasons. We are angry because the Pope says that condoms spread HIV/AIDS. We are angry because you try to get religion taught in science classes. We are angry because you prevent same-sex marriage from being legal. We are angry because we are the most distrusted minority group for no apparent reason. We are angry because you proclaim that our lives are worthless and that we have no basis for morality just because we don’t believe in your God. Again, the tip of the iceberg metaphor applies here.

How about you attend to the arguments brought up rather than avoiding them because the content is the same regardless of the emotional force. Time and time again I get comments on this blog which are completely irrelevant to the post and going off some religious tangent. But, then again most of you loud mouth type religious people wouldn’t understand logic and reason if it nailed you to a cross.

The hypocrisy is painfully apparent when you judge it is perfectly fine when people convert to Christianity emotionally. Somehow it is so much more logical when emotionally vulnerable people convert compared to when people who have good reasons to not believe in God do just that. That’s not really too surprising when you think about how you need to indoctrinate children while their young to get them to believe.

Could you people for once get off your high horses and think for yourself rather than being told what to think? Just a thought.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: atheist • Christianity • convert • god • hypocrisy • indoctrinate • logic • Morality • pope • reason • religious • same sex marriage

God is Weak

On February 1, 2010, In Arguments against God, Nature of God, Religious Arguments, By The Armchair Antichrist

There is just so much mental gymnastics that religious people engage in. It really is a mystery how they handle all the cognitive dissonance so well.This time it is the claim that God cannot do something that is contrary to his nature. His nature is the basis of our morality so it is claimed that God cannot lie or sin. This is such an easily refutable statement that it is a wonder to me that why a large number of Christian debaters including William Lane Craig have used it.

If God cannot do even one thing then he cannot be all-powerful. In an effort to reinforce the ‘morality comes from God’ argument they have sacrificed one of God’s key attributes: omnipotence. Heck, if I can do two things that God cannot then I am technically more powerful than God in some regard. It seems that the concept of God is so fragile that it will fall apart at any moment.

Related to this is the claim that God is bound to the laws of logic. And this is of course to counter the paradoxes of whether God can make a rock so heavy that even he can’t lift it or whether he can make a square circle. This approach again fails miserably. Omnipotence is by definition ‘unlimited’ power. So, God cannot be limited by anything especially if he is supposedly the author of the laws of logic which is suggested by the transcendental argument (which of course also fails epicly).

First, a weak hell. Now, a weak God. What’s next?

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: all powerful • christian debaters • cognitive dissonance • logic • mental gymnastics • Morality • omnipotence • transcendental argument • william lane craig

Bold Faced Lie

On October 20, 2009, In Religious Arguments, By The Armchair Antichrist

I will present another argument used by some theists which could only be described as either a bold faced lie or the sign that complete compartmentalization has taken place. Here is the argument:

Premise 1: It is better to believe in something that does not change than to believe in something that does.

Premise 2: God’s word never changes, but science always changes.

Conclusion: Therefore, you should believe in God’s word and not believe in science.

This argument commits the bare assertion fallacy. One of the premises in the argument is assumed to be true just because it says that it is true. This kind of reminds me of the bible. I guess it is not all that surprising that some theists use this argument considering their poor track record with regards to logic. But, I just find it plainly idiotic.

Do people who use this argument have a problem with rational thinking? Do they have a problem with empirical evidence? Do they have a problem with progressively gaining more knowledge about the world? How can they take advantage of all the advancements, innovations, and luxuries provided by science and still use this completely moronic argument?

In all other areas of life these things are important. But, when it comes to religion anything goes. With some mental compartmentalization even the most ridiculous and illogical things can be uttered and zealously championed.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: bare assertion • compartmentalization • empirical • fallacy • god • logic • rational • Science • theist

If God Does Not Exist, Everything is Permitted?

On October 16, 2009, In Christianity, Media Critiques, Morality, By The Armchair Antichrist

This quote is one of the most widely used by theists (e.g., William Lane Craig). But, is there any basis for this quote? Did Dostoyevsky even make this quote? And is this quote valid in reality? In this post I will attempt to answer these questions.

Firstly, this quote cannot be found anywhere in The Brothers Karamazov. It is an accurate summary of the beliefs held by one of the characters, Ivan Karamazov, in the early chapters of the novel. But, the character himself does not utter this sentence. To recap, this sentence or anything close to it does not appear in The Brothers Karamazov or four other famous Dostoyevsky novels for that matter. Dostoyevsky simply did not make this quote.

This attempt at deceit is beyond the practice of quote-mining which theists have been known to use. It is a blatant misattribution of a quote to one of the world’s most famous writers and complete intellectual dishonesty. Nonetheless, even if Dostoyevsky did make this quote, using it as evidence for anything on the sole basis that he said it would only be an appeal to authority.

But, lets look at the content of the quote. Again it is one of those quasi-arguments that assumes something before trying to provide evidence for it. And of course it assumes that God does exist because we know that everything is not permitted in the world. But, logic doesn’t work that way.

You can’t start by assuming something is true to prove that it is true. That is the mark of backwards religious thinking: you start with something you want to believe is true and then find what complies with that, all the while ignoring disconfirming evidence.

Even with a general knowledge of Christianity it is possible to see that the quote is wrong. In Christianity all your sins will be forgiven as long as you sincerely beg for forgiveness. It doesn’t matter how severe the crime is. It could be theft, arson, rape, murder, even genocide. As long as you ask for forgiveness it will be granted. It seems that, contrary to the quote, all is permissible as long as there is a God.

Furthermore, Christians will say that we do not always get justice in this world. In fact, there seems to be a lot of injustice in this world: many good people live bad lives and many bad people live good lives. So, they believe that this necessitates an ultimate court beyond our world to apply justice when it can’t be found in our own. This is merely an appeal to consequences and wishful thinking. The existence of injustice in this world does not mean that there must be a source of ultimate source of justice beyond it. Theists are just invoking God to hide from reality.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: brothers karamazov • christian • Christianity • dostoevsky • genocide • justice • logic • murder • quote mining • rape • religious • william lane craig

A Bad Explanation is Not Better Than No Explanation

On October 9, 2009, In Arguments Against Religion, Science, By The Armchair Antichrist

Many of the arguments that theists use for God express the belief that an atheist worldview cannot explain things well enough. Well, of course. No atheist believes that he or she knows everything. And it is no shame to admit it. There are some things we do know about the universe and many things we don’t know. We don’t know fully how the brain works, we don’t know what dark energy is, we don’t know about events within the Planck epoch and so on. So yes, there are a lot of things we don’t know, but we are still trying to look for the answers.

But, that does not give any credence to the God hypothesis. If anything, explaining things with God inhibits further discovery and exploration. And using God to explain things is the true mark of close-mindedness. It means you can stop thinking because there cannot be anything else beyond what my holy book says. But, just because science does not have an answer right now does not mean science will never have an answer. And even if science never solves something it by no means makes God a better explanation.

If you are unhappy with the current state of science then you should try to do better science, not sprinkle some fairy dust on the problem and call it solved.

Premise 1: You don’t have an answer for x.
Premise 2: I believe in God.
Conclusion: God is the answer for x because you don’t have an answer for x.

This logic is invalid and the absurdity is plainly visible.

Further elucidations may be found in a previous post titled A Magic Man Done It.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: atheist • brain • close-minded • dark energy • god • hypothesis • logic • planck epoch • Science • theist • universe

Argument from Authority

On September 21, 2009, In Christianity, Philosophy, Religious Arguments, By The Armchair Antichrist

Another common tactic used by theists is listing various scientists of the past who believed in God such as Galileo, Newton, Coppernicus, Kepler, Farraday and so on. They think that this is somehow persuasive. What they fail to forget is that these scientists lived and died before the theory of evolution explained the diversity of life. In other words, it was much easier to evoke God because there was so much that was unexplained. Furthermore, these figures lived in times when religion was more prevalent.

Theists will also list modern scientists who believe in God, but fortunately they are in the minority. Furthermore, many of these scientists who say they believe in a God don’t believe in a personal one. With further examination you will find that those who say they believe in god are actually deistic or believe in a pantheistic god.

But, even withholding all the explanations I have given this argument is still one purely from authority which is a fallacy of logic. Just because an authority figure accepts something does not make it necessarily true. Science doesn’t work this way. Science is based on the evidence. And I would bet that if the scientists of the past could review all the data we have today that they would deconvert back to atheism in a heartbeat.

Conversely, a similar tactic is also used by theists. Some of them accuse Charles Darwin of racism and sexism and somehow attribute it to the theory of evolution. That is a failed approach. Would it make sense to not believe in the theory of relativity because Einstein was also racist and sexist? Of course not. Also, in Darwin’s time they had much different standards on what was considered sexist and racist. This doesn’t fully excuse him of harboring those discriminatory beliefs (if he indeed held them), but it still has no bearing on the validity of the theory he developed. If you wish to disconfirm evolution or any other scientific theory you must do so scientifically, instead of trying to convince people with these unscientific and deceptive methods.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)