One more thing. If you want a wider audience to access the point you are making (remember how many people are creationists here in the US), you should use a more accessible and universally accepted example, like the Japanese soldier one you used. If you want a contemporary example, choose something there is more agreement on or people with miss your point—it’s like calling your opponent a Nazi—you already lost the argument even if you are right.
I suppose if you are only addressing the skeptical audience, you could use such an example, the way I could use the example of atheists who ignore the obviousness of God’s existence as witnessed in creation if I were talking to Christians. But if I am trying to also reach atheists, perhaps I would use a different example.
The lack of responses and negative scores on my comment show me that (1) it is easier to vote down a post than post a reasoned response, and (2) it is easier to scoff at opponents and think them fools than confront one’s own self-deceptive behaviors, the very purpose of Luke’s post.
The lack of responses and negative scores on my comment show me that (1) it is easier to vote down a post than post a reasoned response, and (2) it is easier to scoff at opponents and think them fools than confront one’s own self-deceptive behaviors, the very purpose of Luke’s post.
No, it is simply that LW has covered these issues and considers them solved* and so downvotes/ignores people asserting otherwise.
*the weight of evidence points towards evolution, and every point proposed by proponents of creationism and ID has been refuted (do you have a distinctly novel and original argument for creationism/ID? If you don’t, then you are wasting your time).
One more thing. If you want a wider audience to access the point you are making (remember how many people are creationists here in the US), you should use a more accessible and universally accepted example, like the Japanese soldier one you used. If you want a contemporary example, choose something there is more agreement on or people with miss your point—it’s like calling your opponent a Nazi—you already lost the argument even if you are right.
I suppose if you are only addressing the skeptical audience, you could use such an example, the way I could use the example of atheists who ignore the obviousness of God’s existence as witnessed in creation if I were talking to Christians. But if I am trying to also reach atheists, perhaps I would use a different example.
The lack of responses and negative scores on my comment show me that (1) it is easier to vote down a post than post a reasoned response, and (2) it is easier to scoff at opponents and think them fools than confront one’s own self-deceptive behaviors, the very purpose of Luke’s post.
No, it is simply that LW has covered these issues and considers them solved* and so downvotes/ignores people asserting otherwise.
*the weight of evidence points towards evolution, and every point proposed by proponents of creationism and ID has been refuted (do you have a distinctly novel and original argument for creationism/ID? If you don’t, then you are wasting your time).