Jumping to conclusions

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Jumping to conclusions

Post #1

Post by nobspeople »

Thanks, again, to WILLIAM, for inspiration of this idea.

Our friend William, in another post, said the following:
"But to suggest "there is no god at all", jumps to conclusions..."
The conversation was about contradictions in the bible. It made me wonder who, exactly, is jumping to conclusion when it comes to the modern christian god.

A biblical contradiction (for example) proving there is no god, could be a big jump indeed. But claiming there IS a god is just a big of a jump, if not bigger, one could argue.

The non-believers that 'jump to the conclusion' that there is no god based on biblical contradictions, which are actually there in print in god's 'autobiography', or the believers of a god where there is no proof other than the god that exists in their mind (aka no proof)?

For discussion:
Who jumps to conclusions more, the believers or the skeptic?

EDITED for clarification
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7969
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 933 times
Been thanked: 3488 times

Re: Jumping to conclusions

Post #2

Post by TRANSPONDER »

I'd say the believer, in my experience. Yes, the Bible or God - apologists try to force on atheism an assertion of God -denial. But that is never the actual logical position of atheism, which is that for a god, the evidence is not compelling and thus, from not knowing (agnosticism - a term often wildly misapplied to irreligious theists) not - believing the god -claim is the logically mandated default. It is not some leap of non-faith or leap to any conclusion. It is not a conclusion, but a reserved position pending any better argument for a god, and the same applies to the Bible, gospels and Jesus, once enough doubts about the book have been raised.

The Theist and Bible -believer side, however do seem inclined to jump to conclusions. The obvious one is that IF one can prove a creator (using cosmic origins, ID, origins of Life or consciousness) then that it is Biblegod that must be the creator in question is the Leap of Faith that we get. We know why; the Bible is bolstered by 'Who made everything, then?' or 'the Creator is Biblegod' is bolstered by appeal to the Bible as reliable. It is not so much jumping to a conclusion, but starting with a Conclusion before the debate even gets going.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Jumping to conclusions

Post #3

Post by nobspeople »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:43 am I'd say the believer, in my experience. Yes, the Bible or God - apologists try to force on atheism an assertion of God -denial. But that is never the actual logical position of atheism, which is that for a god, the evidence is not compelling and thus, from not knowing (agnosticism - a term often wildly misapplied to irreligious theists) not - believing the god -claim is the logically mandated default. It is not some leap of non-faith or leap to any conclusion. It is not a conclusion, but a reserved position pending any better argument for a god, and the same applies to the Bible, gospels and Jesus, once enough doubts about the book have been raised.

The Theist and Bible -believer side, however do seem inclined to jump to conclusions. The obvious one is that IF one can prove a creator (using cosmic origins, ID, origins of Life or consciousness) then that it is Biblegod that must be the creator in question is the Leap of Faith that we get. We know why; the Bible is bolstered by 'Who made everything, then?' or 'the Creator is Biblegod' is bolstered by appeal to the Bible as reliable. It is not so much jumping to a conclusion, but starting with a Conclusion before the debate even gets going.
Good point, particular that last paragraph. Chritians seems to want there to be a creator. Once that's 'established', they demand it's their god, and not anything else. It's almost like a slippery slope in reverse, which is ironic as the 'slippery slope' argument christians seems to use all the time to try to prevent things they don't like being 'allowed' or not looked down upon.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7969
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 933 times
Been thanked: 3488 times

Re: Jumping to conclusions

Post #4

Post by TRANSPONDER »

The slippery slope' argument (an informal logical fallacy) is a parallel in that the one making the argument already has the conclusion in mind.

"If atheists are allowed any kind of expression, how long will it be before they are herding Christians into Concentration - camps?" Yes, That has been used, but is obviously extreme (never mind hinting at what they'd do to us if they could). Of course slippery slope events have occurred so they are not per se invalid, but cannot be used to invalidate an argument on the unproven assumption that such and such will be the result.

The similarity to the leap of faith is an a priori conviction that is already there to be leaped (or slope -slidden) to with far too much ease.

Post Reply