Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



12/02/2018 2:05 pm  #1


Two fallacies

The unorthodox fallacy: The proposition is radically contrary to traditional or culturally-normative beliefs, therefore it's true. One may think of a naive fundamentalist Christian assuming a rebellious streak after encountering the skeptical worldview of college professors or the general ethos of secular cultural.

The voluntarist fallacy: The proposition is strongly believed in therefore it's true. This fallacy may be more of a self-delusory stubbornness than anything else. For instance, as a child I strongly believed in the rapture (thanks Dad for introducing me to The Stand) and to me an unpremised belief, so long as I strongly believed, was enough to justify its truth. I think this fallacy is also prevalent in a lot political debate, where being a devotee to a set of opinions is enough to justify the truth of those opinions. Of course these beliefs are not totally unpremised but--in my experience--one's will can be deceptive when it is accompanied by the fervor of political allegiances, and sometimes merely its force is the true deciding factor of the conclusions we accept.

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum