On angry mobs

I love how in online debates people think volume equals victory.

Somehow the fact that 200 angry commenters at the world’s biggest atheist blog all disagreed with me makes them correct.

And atheists are the first to suggest that majority rule does not make a position automatically correct. When it suits them of course.

This tactic is up there with giving a phenomena a name (eg “Godwin’s Law”) and thus making the use of long held positions and ideas somehow laughable. It’s name it and shame it rather than name it and claim it. It’s odd. Similarly, having some sort of well known theory like Pascal’s Wager “debunked” by people who disagree with it… I’m glad atheists have rebuttals for every position put forward by Christians. It probably helps them to sleep at night. The issue really rests on that which separates theists from atheists… if theists are correct then every rebuttal atheists make on the basis of “logic” or “science” will be shown to be incorrect, and vice versa.

This is the problem I was trying to address in my list also… the question of whether God exists divides down the line of people who think everything came from nothing and the people who think that everything came from God. Either the universe came first, or God did. That’s the complexity I was referring to in my list. While some atheist philosophers think a watch in a field lends itself to chance – other philosophers think a watch in a field lends itself to the idea of a watchmaker.

Just because you’ve made up your mind on that issue doesn’t make the other answer any less rational. It’s probably more rational – because the simplest answer is to assume a creator, not the other way around.

4 Comments On angry mobs

  1. Stephen

    And yet the favorite sciencist myth is the one Galileo standing before the might of the mob of the Catholic Church in the service of truth. You’d think they’d be against bully tactics.

  2. KKairos

    Funny thing I noticed–

    If the atheists are right, they’ll never know that they’re right–but if the theists (at least those who believe in immortality) are right, they WILL know if they’re wrong.

    But if us theists are all wrong (unless there’s some way we can preserve personal immortality besides), we’ll NEVER know.

    Sorry. it just came to my mind and was funny.

  3. KKairos

    There’s something I’ve written that I want the author of this blog to see but would prefer to be private; my e-mail address is kkairos at gmail dot com, if he wants to e-mail me about it; I figure giving him my address even in comments is safer for everyone; plus there’s not another really secure way for him to give me his.

  4. A. Noyd

    “Just because you’ve made up your mind on that issue doesn’t make the other answer any less rational. It’s probably more rational – because the simplest answer is to assume a creator, not the other way around.”

    Just because you can repeat long-discredited philosophical arguments (the watchmaker analogy, Pascal’s wager) doesn’t mean they’re suddenly un-discredited. Just because you don’t understand what’s wrong with posing ridiculous, question-begging false dichotomies (either the universe was first or god was) doesn’t mean they’re not ridiculous, question-begging false dichotomies. Just because your ignorance lets you say whatever you want of atheists (atheists think everything came from nothing and we think we won because there were more of us than you) doesn’t mean atheists actually think that. And just because you like to chuck rocks at wasp nests doesn’t mean that wasps are unreasonable for going after you.

    All you’ve done is shown the world you haven’t done your homework and need someone to blame. But just because you can whine that it’s someone else’s fault you look an ignorant fool doesn’t mean it’s anyone’s fault but your own. So instead of lobbing more rocks, why don’t you stay in your own corner of the internet where you aren’t outclassed a hundred times over, where no one will notice your awful logic and long-outdated arguments, and where there aren’t enough atheists that people can see where your uninformed generalizations fail. And don’t worry, I won’t be back. Someone who thinks Pascal’s wager ends all arguments clearly isn’t worth more of my time.

Comments are closed.