Return to Index  

There's not much I can do if you reject evidence for non-scientific reasons

July 26 2011 at 4:31 AM

JVH say  (Login JVH)

Response to There's not much I can do if you reject evidence for non-scientific reasons



.... and instead present/apply fallacies such as 'moving the goal posts' (leading to) 'argument by infinite regression', 'argument by ignorance', 'argument by impossible perfection', 'argument by question' (interrogation), 'argument by loaded question', 'argument by rhetorical question' etc..

Asking questions is easy, it's answering them that might be the hard part especially when questions don't have snappy answers or no snappy answers the questioner has the background for to understand.


Those who present/apply fallacies do so either wittingly or unwittingly and both options happen to be self-explanatory - not to say self-evident.

Moving the goalposts, also known as raising the bar, is an informal logical fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim or question is dismissed and some other (greater) evidence is demanded. (After an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt) This attempts to leave the impression that an argument or answer had a fair hearing while actually trying to end with a preordained conclusion.

rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -

New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
[linked image]

CD: short for inevitability

This message has been edited by JVH on Jul 26, 2011 4:35 AM

 Respond to this message   
Find more forums on Religion and PhilosophyCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2018 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement