The Ten Commandments of Logic

Chat viewable by general public

Moderator: Moderators

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25089
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 72 times

The Ten Commandments of Logic

Post #1

Post by Zzyzx »

.
The Ten Commandments of Logic

1. Thou shalt not attack the person's character, but the argument (Ad hominem)

2. Thou shalt not misrepresent or exaggerate a person's argument in order to make it easier to attack (Straw man fallacy)

3. Thou shalt not use small numbers to represent the all (Hasty generalization)

4, Thou shalt not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true (Begging the question / Circular reasoning / Petitio Principii)

5. Thou shalt not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause (Post hoc / False cause)

6. Thou shalt not reduce the argument down to two possibilities when others do or may exist (False dichotomy)

7. Thou shalt not argue that because of our ignorance, a claim must be true or false (Ad ignorantum)

8, Thou shalt not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim (Burden of proof reversal)

9. Thou shalt not assume "this" follows "that" when there is no logical connection (Non sequitur)

10. Thou shat not argue that because a premise is popular, therefore it must be true (Bandwagon fallacy / argumentum ad populum)
.
Non-Theist

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

Online
benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2104
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1354 times
Been thanked: 517 times

Post #11

Post by benchwarmer »

Overcomer wrote: I've read the Book of Mormon. There is no historical evidence for anything it says. It's full of errors and there have been many versions of it down through the years as Mormons try to deal with those errors.
The irony is killing me.... Must refrain.... ah never mind, let's see how it takes for them to realize what's happening here. Two Christians are about to argue over whose book has less errors and evidence. I'll go grab some popcorn. :chew:

Overcomer
Guru
Posts: 1320
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 65 times

Post #12

Post by Overcomer »

benchwarmer wrote:
The irony is killing me.... Must refrain.... ah never mind, let's see how it takes for them to realize what's happening here. Two Christians are about to argue over whose book has less errors and evidence. I'll go grab some popcorn
Have you read the Book of Mormon? There is no historical or archaeological evidence for its contents.

On the other hand, there is all kinds of historical and archaeological evidence for the Bible. Even non-Christian historians and archaeologists will tell you that. Perhaps you could do some research and discover that for yourself while you're enjoying your popcorn! ;)

You could start here:

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/

Mormons call themselves Christian, but they do not believe what Christians have believed since the days of Christ. They use the same terminology, but mean entirely different things when they talk about God, Jesus, salvation, etc. Therefore, I take exception to you putting the two of us in the same category. See here:

https://carm.org/comparison-between-chr ... n-doctrine

And I think your mocking words break rule #1.

Online
benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2104
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1354 times
Been thanked: 517 times

Post #13

Post by benchwarmer »

Overcomer wrote: benchwarmer wrote:
The irony is killing me.... Must refrain.... ah never mind, let's see how it takes for them to realize what's happening here. Two Christians are about to argue over whose book has less errors and evidence. I'll go grab some popcorn
Have you read the Book of Mormon? There is no historical or archaeological evidence for its contents.
No I have not read it. I'll take your word that there is no historical or archaeological evidence for it and let a Mormon present their case if there is any.
Overcomer wrote: On the other hand, there is all kinds of historical and archaeological evidence for the Bible.
For the Bible? Yes, I have a number of them on my shelf. For the god character and the miraculous stories in the Bible? I look forward to your historical and archaeological evidence for those things. Does the Bible mention actual places? Sure, so does Spider Man. Does the Bible mention some actual people? Sure, that doesn't mean the entire tome is supported.
Overcomer wrote: Even non-Christian historians and archaeologists will tell you that. Perhaps you could do some research and discover that for yourself while you're enjoying your popcorn! ;)
I'm already familiar with the parts of the Bible that are based on actual places and people. These parts don't help the fiction around them. I'll enjoy my popcorn while you folks argue about the various errors thanks.
Overcomer wrote: Mormons call themselves Christian, but they do not believe what Christians have believed since the days of Christ. They use the same terminology, but mean entirely different things when they talk about God, Jesus, salvation, etc. Therefore, I take exception to you putting the two of us in the same category.
But it is not I that put you in the same category. You both call yourselves Christians, so you need to sort it out among yourselves and get back to us when you've got it all squared away.

heistrue
Student
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 13 times

Re:

Post #14

Post by heistrue »

TSGracchus wrote: Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:17 pm
Zionite wrote: OK, let's take the Book of Mormon. It was translated by a prophet of God, and it's the truest book in the world. Follow the precepts that are laid out in this book, and you will gain Eternal Life.
Or we could take the Koran, dictated to a prophet by an angel, and subsequently, by that prophet, who was illiterate, to others.
As it turned out, some of the of the original dictation was by SATAN and had to be corrected. It is utterly irrelevant that the prophet was a bandit, a murderer and a pedophile. None of that means it wasn't true.

Now the Book of Mormon is different. The prophet who received this book was a convicted confidence artist, who, imprisoned for destroying a printing press that was going to expose his sexual shenanigans with the wives and daughters of his flock, and for treason against the state of Missouri, was killed while imprisoned by... Well, no one was convicted, although I suspect the mob was composed largely of former flock members disaffected by his attentions to their wives and daughters.
Of course, that is not evidence that it wasn't originally written on golden tablets in some form of Egyptian that had to be translated by the use of magic stones placed in a hat. Smith was, like Muhammad, largely illiterate and actually dictated the book while talking through his hat.

Death of Joseph Smith-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Joseph_Smith

The Bible, the Q'uran, and the Book of Mormon are evidence only that books were written. Superman comics exists, but very few take them as evidence that Superman exists.

:study:
No thank you, it is a book written without any aim to teach anyone about SALVATION nor HEALING.

heistrue
Student
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 13 times

Re:

Post #15

Post by heistrue »

Overcomer wrote: Fri Jun 22, 2018 8:24 pm I've read the Book of Mormon. There is no historical evidence for anything it says. It's full of errors and there have been many versions of it down through the years as Mormons try to deal with those errors. See here:

https://www.watchman.org/articles/mormo ... -evidence/

https://christiananswers.net/q-cc/cc-archaeology.html

And given the number of prophecies of Joseph Smith that didn't come true, we can declare him a false prophet because, according to the Bible (Deut. 18:15-22), the sure sign of a false prophet is prophecies that don't come true.

http://mit.irr.org/failed-prophecies-of-joseph-smith

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/ca ... eph-smith/

Of course, being a Mormon, you can just say those verses in the Bible are corrupt. But even without the statement from the Bible, do you really think that a man of God would get all of those things wrong?

heistrue
Student
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 13 times

Re: Re:

Post #16

Post by heistrue »

heistrue wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:48 am
TSGracchus wrote: Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:17 pm
Zionite wrote: OK, let's take the Book of Mormon. It was translated by a prophet of God, and it's the truest book in the world. Follow the precepts that are laid out in this book, and you will gain Eternal Life.
Or we could take the Koran, dictated to a prophet by an angel, and subsequently, by that prophet, who was illiterate, to others.
As it turned out, some of the of the original dictation was by SATAN and had to be corrected. It is utterly irrelevant that the prophet was a bandit, a murderer and a pedophile. None of that means it wasn't true.

Now the Book of Mormon is different. The prophet who received this book was a convicted confidence artist, who, imprisoned for destroying a printing press that was going to expose his sexual shenanigans with the wives and daughters of his flock, and for treason against the state of Missouri, was killed while imprisoned by... Well, no one was convicted, although I suspect the mob was composed largely of former flock members disaffected by his attentions to their wives and daughters.
Of course, that is not evidence that it wasn't originally written on golden tablets in some form of Egyptian that had to be translated by the use of magic stones placed in a hat. Smith was, like Muhammad, largely illiterate and actually dictated the book while talking through his hat.

Death of Joseph Smith-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Joseph_Smith

The Bible, the Q'uran, and the Book of Mormon are evidence only that books were written. Superman comics exists, but very few take them as evidence that Superman exists.

:study:
No thank you, it is a book written without any aim to teach anyone about SALVATION nor HEALING.
We all have a choice, of 2, either eternal separation from God or eternal punishment with Lucifer... The fundamental basis of Gods Word, as given to us by GOD through all of the prophets, especially His real flesh and blood is to save all mankind. We all have a choice..

User avatar
Difflugia
Guru
Posts: 2296
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1848 times
Been thanked: 1364 times

Re:

Post #17

Post by Difflugia »

benchwarmer wrote: Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:26 pm
Overcomer wrote:Have you read the Book of Mormon? There is no historical or archaeological evidence for its contents.
No I have not read it. I'll take your word that there is no historical or archaeological evidence for it and let a Mormon present their case if there is any.
I realize that this is a necro'd thread and I don't know how much time you spend reading for pleasure, but I find the Book of Mormon to be entertaining when read as a kind of Bible fan fiction. It's about the length of a long novel and there are significant chunks that just repeat sections of the Bible (particularly Isaiah) verbatim, so you can skip those without missing anything.

The character Nephi is the protagonist of the first two books of the Book of Mormon and is Joseph Smith's alter ego. The story begins with Nephi's father, Lehi, having prophetic visions that are very similar to ones that Joseph's father, Joseph Sr., described having himself. Nephi's older brothers made fun of their dad, but Nephi defended him, after which God spoke to Nephi. God told Nephi what a good son he was being and promised Nephi that if his older brothers picked on him any more, God would smite them around a bit.

It's probably not coincidence that Joseph Jr. was about fourteen when he started coming up with this stuff and had two older brothers.

For me, the "and it came to pass" and "yea even" sort of fades into the background after a few pages and it becomes sort of a fun and endearing story told by a teenager. God is a much more personal deity, much like He was for Moses, becoming both literary and literal deus ex machina to help Nephi out of tight spots. It doesn't make for a particularly compelling plotline in a literary sense (if an omnipotent friend is always there to help, conflict isn't exactly dramatic), but it's a fun teenage fantasy, roughly on par with early pulp sci-fi novels (think A Princess of Mars set in the prehistoric American wilderness).

Maybe that's not your thing and Smith was certainly no L. Ron Hubbard, but I found the Book of Mormon to be enjoyable once I shed the notion that it was supposed to be sacred and true history.

User avatar
Sherlock Holmes
Under Suspension
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:42 am
Has thanked: 48 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: The Ten Commandments of Logic

Post #18

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Zzyzx wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2016 7:47 pm .
The Ten Commandments of Logic

1. Thou shalt not attack the person's character, but the argument (Ad hominem)

2. Thou shalt not misrepresent or exaggerate a person's argument in order to make it easier to attack (Straw man fallacy)

3. Thou shalt not use small numbers to represent the all (Hasty generalization)

4, Thou shalt not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true (Begging the question / Circular reasoning / Petitio Principii)

5. Thou shalt not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause (Post hoc / False cause)

6. Thou shalt not reduce the argument down to two possibilities when others do or may exist (False dichotomy)

7. Thou shalt not argue that because of our ignorance, a claim must be true or false (Ad ignorantum)

8, Thou shalt not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim (Burden of proof reversal)

9. Thou shalt not assume "this" follows "that" when there is no logical connection (Non sequitur)

10. Thou shat not argue that because a premise is popular, therefore it must be true (Bandwagon fallacy / argumentum ad populum)
I wish more people were familiar with this kind of list, it would save a lot of time and help eliminate so many wasted posts.
When one has eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1338
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 97 times
Contact:

Re: The Ten Commandments of Logic

Post #19

Post by AgnosticBoy »

Here's an interesting list of fallacies...

Blind Loyalty: Arguing something is right solely because a respected leader or source says it is right.
Source: here

Guilt by association fallacy:
A guilt by association fallacy occurs when someone connects an opponent to a demonized group of people or to a bad person in order to discredit his or her argument.
Source:here

The Half Truth (also Card Stacking, Incomplete Information).Telling the truth but deliberately omitting important key details in order to falsify the larger picture and support a false conclusion.
Source: here

Analysis paralysis:
Analysis paralysis (or paralysis by analysis) describes an individual or group process when overanalyzing or overthinking a situation can cause forward motion or decision-making to become "paralyzed", meaning that no solution or course of action is decided upon within a natural time frame.
Source: Wikipedia

Snow Job:
"Proving” a claim by overwhelming an audience with mountains of irrelevant facts, numbers, documents, graphs and statistics that they cannot be expected to understand.
Source: here
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1338
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 97 times
Contact:

Re: The Ten Commandments of Logic

Post #20

Post by AgnosticBoy »

The appeal to pity:
Argumentum ad Misericordiam (argument from pity or misery): the fallacy committed when pity or a related emotion such as sympathy, mercy, or compassion is illicitly appealed to for the sake of getting a conclusion accepted.

For example, consider the following argument from an editorial arguing in favor of establishing a path to U.S. citizenship for undocumented immigrants:
“[Texas Sen. Ted] Cruz stated his opposition to giving illegal immigrants a path to U.S. citizenship. … I could introduce Cruz to an undocumented immigrant, … [a father who] was afraid to go out to dinner with his kids on Father's Day lest he get stopped by police and deported.”[1]
The father's fear of deportation is not, by itself, a cogent reason he should have a path to citizenship. Instead, the emotion appealed to is a distraction from evidence which could have been adduced.
Source: https://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/misery.html
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

Post Reply