Gunnar wrote:Ldsfaqs urged us to think carefully about theses issues and the relevant data and evidence available. Indeed we should, but thinking rationally is what is really important. Unfortunately, for ldsfaqs, thinking carefully amounts to "how can I cherry pick and spin the data so that it can be made to seem to support what I already believe."
Gunner, from your posts, I suspect you are a good man. I think it's admirable that you try to influence faqs in a positive way.
But seriously, do you really think he will ever "think carefully about theses issues and the relevant data and evidence available?" Honestly, if I had to bet money, it would be on his inability to think anything through, let alone admit new evidence into his world view. He just may be the least self-aware person I've ever encountered. Rigorous intellectualism is not his thing.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Gunnar wrote:Ldsfaqs urged us to think carefully about theses issues and the relevant data and evidence available. Indeed we should, but thinking rationally is what is really important. Unfortunately, for ldsfaqs, thinking carefully amounts to "how can I cherry pick and spin the data so that it can be made to seem to support what I already believe."
Gunner, from your posts, I suspect you are a good man. I think it's admirable that you try to influence faqs in a positive way.
But seriously, do you really think he will ever "think carefully about theses issues and the relevant data and evidence available?" Honestly, if I had to bet money, it would be on his inability to think anything through, let alone admit new evidence into his world view. He just may be the least self-aware person I've ever encountered. Rigorous intellectualism is not his thing.
I don't disagree with that at all. I think that ldsfaqs is the most extreme example of the backfire effect that I have ever seen (with the possible exceptions of Droopy and LittleNipper). But, perhaps, some others who might be inclined to take ldsfaqs seriously might be inclined to reconsider that mistake after reading our attempts to show the inherent fallacies in his mode of thinking.
I appreciate your comments though. You are one of my favorite contributors to this forum.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
