Friday 29 May 2015

Wednesday 27 May 2015

Estranged Notions: Is “Heaven” to Blame for Murder?

Today's post:

Is “Heaven” to Blame for Murder?

Horn incorrectly frames an argument (concerning the Janzen murder/suicide case) as being a fallacious appeal to consequences, by conflating the concepts of “X is true” and “belief in X is good”; the first is a fact question, the second a value question.

For bonus points, Horn then proceeds to gratuitously bring in the issue of homosexuality. I find myself very much in favour of this move and think that Catholic apologists should engage in it whenever possible; the more that they harp on it, the more it diminishes their credibility in modern society.

Friday 15 May 2015

Wednesday 13 May 2015

Estranged Notions: Do You Need God to Know That Abortion is Wrong?

Oh dear.

Do You Need God to Know That Abortion is Wrong?

I don't know whether this is deliberate dishonesty or egregious error: the article has a graph[edit: see below] supposedly showing the "latest" polling data on abortion but which is actually from 2012. This isn't because the whole article is recycled, either, because it is responding to a piece in The New Republic from last month.

Tuesday 5 May 2015

Estranged Notions: Why Atheists Change Their Mind: 8 Common Factors

Today's post (or yesterday's by the time I'm done with this):

Why Atheists Change Their Mind: 8 Common Factors

There's a whole list of things wrong with this article, unsurprisingly. It's a typical religious apologist's view of conversion that prefers anecdote to facts.

Friday 1 May 2015

Estranged Notions: Can Victims of Cannibals be Raised from the Dead?

Today's post:

Can Victims of Cannibals be Raised from the Dead?

Honestly, a question like that could well be raised in, say, a discussion of the Resurrection spell in D&D, in which everyone involved is aware that it's just a game. As with Newland's previous post on resurrection, though, trying to bring it up in what is supposed to be a serious rational discussion is little more than a joke.

Also, the article makes no attempt whatsoever to actually deal with recycling as an objection to the previous article.