-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Intellectually dishonest?
- Thread starter LogDog
- Start date
Buttercup
Veteran Member
Hmm. If intellectual dishonesty includes overlooking some aspects of a religion that don't make sense so you could continue to believe, then yes. I was certainly guilty of that.
No. Is there any degree of intellectual dishonesty involved in posting such questions as a cheap substitute for making cogent arguments?
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
ROTFLMAO!
Evangelical Atheism just amuses the heck out of me!
Regards:biglaugh: :biglaugh: :takeabow:
How about a precursory look at what Intellectual Dishonesty means.
In order to do it, you'd have to make a conscious decision to ignore evidence that blatantly exists proving "The Truth".
Since no such condition is in place, no intellectual dishonesty can occur. It is a strawman argument.
In order to do it, you'd have to make a conscious decision to ignore evidence that blatantly exists proving "The Truth".
Since no such condition is in place, no intellectual dishonesty can occur. It is a strawman argument.
It's a good thing I'm a Nihilist
Depends, of course, on how they define things like "truth" and "supernatural." And "proof."
Nevertheless, many on these forums do proclaim "the Truth".
That is why if a lit match is ever thrown down, I'm scooting away before all of the straw engulfs me.:tribal2:
If there were any indication that women could become pregnant (barring the use of modern technology) without having intercourse or that the dead can come back to life, or that snakes can talk, Id agree that accepting such supernatural claims wouldnt be intellectually dishonest. When one holds onto a belief that is unjustified in the face of strong contradictory evidence, then its my position that there is at least some blatantly irrational thinking going on. If you advocate a position that is know to be false, you are being intellectually dishonest. If you are aware of evidence to the contrary but continue to advocate a belief in unfounded claims, you are being intellectually dishonest.
Booko
Deviled Hen
It's a good thing I'm a Nihilist
Does that mean you can be amused by nothing? :biglaugh:
Booko
Deviled Hen
You're being inexact and probably shouldn't be. Women can become pregnant without intercourse. The question is whether they can become pregnant with some involvement of male sperm. To answer that question, I supposed you have to research parthenogenesis.
Also, I would point out that just because someone chooses to take a literal meaning of some story does not mean that a metophorical meaning isn't the better one.
Just because some people are metaphorically impaired doesn't mean you have to follow suit.
Why, to continue to do so when you have been told repeatedly there are other options might even be termed....intellectually dishonest.
So those who accept as literal the supernatural claims of their religion are wrong to do so? Why? Because you said so? What then should they take away from these supernatural claims? Were the writers of these claims expecting their highly uneducated audience of goat herders to be able to decipher what was to be taken as literal and what wasnt?
If the example of a virgin giving birth is too inexact for your taste, substitute walking on water, turning it to wine or creating man from dirt.
Jeremiah
Well-Known Member
What do you mean when you say "spirit of truth"?
As to the OP, I think it is intellectually dishonest to disregard possibilities.
Jaymes
The cake is a lie
Which possibilities? All of them? Including the possibility that there's an invisible green lemon sitting on your shoulder and dictating your every thought and action?