And, they are still 100 arguments in parallel that evolution is false, and my reasoning in the post correctly implies that you can’t read five of them, see that they aren’t good arguments, and conclude that evolution is true.
But that isn’t the conclusion that I’m trying to make.
my reasoning doesn’t stop you from concluding that they have no good reason to disbelieve.
That one is the conclusion that I’m trying to make.
But if those don’t count as 100 parallel arguments because each bad argument speaks to the guy’s incompetence at evaluating arguments, well… someone’s bad argument always speaks to his incompetence at evaluating arguments. Every single list of arguments is like that. So the exception then swallows the rule and there is no such thing as a true list of parallel arguments.
But that isn’t the conclusion that I’m trying to make.
That one is the conclusion that I’m trying to make.
But if those don’t count as 100 parallel arguments because each bad argument speaks to the guy’s incompetence at evaluating arguments, well… someone’s bad argument always speaks to his incompetence at evaluating arguments. Every single list of arguments is like that. So the exception then swallows the rule and there is no such thing as a true list of parallel arguments.