One of the less commonly known fallacies, which usually passes unquestioned, is the "argument by lack of imagination" or alternatively called "argument by ignorance";
To give an example of such argument:
Imagine that at year 1000 BC, two people had this little chat,
PersonX: I wish I can reach the moon.
PersonY: You are unrealistic person. It is impossible to reach the moon.
Obviously, PersonY lacks the basic element of imagination, therefore had made a false assumption based on his ignorance of the possibility to land on the moon.
One of the notable usuages of this kind of argument is in oposition to atheism; It is said that in the old times, this conversation happened between a religious person and an atheist:
Religious: Yesterday i saw a ship; It had no crew, it had no captain, it was sailing in the middle in the sea without anyone onboard!
Atheist: Sorry Sir, I think this is a made up lie!
Religious: So you are telling me that it makes sense that our whole world, with all galaxies... The accurate system in which a simple flaw can be drastic... This big big universe can exist without a captain managing it, yet find it questionable to find a ship without a captain?
Obviously, that religious person lacks the basic element of imagination! I leave the proof to the smartasses out there!! ;)
One of my school teachers used to say: "Imagination is more imprtant than knowledge"; I have to agree, because you can gain knowledge by imagination, while without the element of imagination you cannot make use of the knowledge you have!
Posts
7 comments:
every arguement should not be blindly accepted nor fully rejected.
if you found the religious taking the existance of the Universe Captain for granted, this does not indicate that he believed this arguement to be true because he was taught so or took it as a fact to be a must. this issue specifically for believers does not go under the category of reasoning. its a matter of belief. its no more an arguement. but before being a belief it was an agruement. but when the religious related the two incidences together it was irrelevant. no similarities. why? they dont have the same backgrounds. what he indicated did not make the picture more real. but more unacceptable for the athiest because he brought a sensitive issue here.
the Athiest also made a mistake, why would he assume that its a lie?!isn't it possible to find a ship without a captain. it exists,,
if he is an athiest he should not think this way, everything is questionable to him. so its not an argument of how athiest vs. religious anymore. its not valid
"the Athiest also made a mistake, why would he assume that its a lie?!"
At a functional level the Athiest didnt make a mistake, because we can conclude that the religious person made up the story of the ship just to make an arguement, so assuming that we can safely and objectively say that the Athiest didnt make a mistake...
If a poor friend of yours told you that they have 10 billion dollars in their pocket right now, you would probably call him a liar; Yet this doesnt imply that such incidence is impossible, but rather rationally unlikely...
BUT, true.. A ship without a captain although very unlikely is possible! In this sense, the atheist could have possibly been mistaken!
"Intelligent design" is one of the arguments used against atheism, and i was demonstrating that claiming that a world cant exist without an "intelligent designer" is a flawed argument... Being an atheist myself i find that people generally fail to realize that our universe doesnt need an intelligent designer!
Athiest but why Satanist?
Interesting question: One of the main goals of this is to explain "why" i believe in the things that i do... It has progressively been adressing sides of satanism, and will in the future!
But before i can go on to explain why i believe in satanism, i want to pose a different question: Why not?
If we can agree that there is no reason not to be a satanist, i can go further and explain why i do!
Basically i believe in:
-Materialism: a more general sense of physicalism, thus i believe that everything that exists can be reduced to a more basic form of matter (consider)
-Atheism: specifically agnostic atheism! My believe doest address the "first cause" dilemma, but rather the view of an anthropomorphic GOD, that has conciousness -and tells "right" from "wrong"- is the view that i reject! (a post addressing this is in the works)
-Individualism
-Selfishness (explained)
-Importance of doubt
-Rejection of the concept of repenting one's past actions
All of which are compatable with satanism, thus none of my beliefs contradict the basic claims of satanism... thus i am a satanist!
from what i read, i believe that you think for yourself. Satanism is not a belief. i dont think you to got to the point where you believe in Satan. Satanism worships Satan, as much as any holy religion worships God. they are all convictions. i dont think you could agree with all what Satanism imply.. it encourages Dark thoughts , hatred, vengence..its violent in general. ok whatever you wrote up there is your right to believe in .. its your own choice. if you want to become a Satanist ..go ahead. but what im telling you ,, is that you mentioned that you don't belong to a political party. the same is here. Don't say you are a Satanist because you are not. you have not been into rituals of it.
because from the way you think i don't think that you support Dark thoughts, i dont think that you will ever want to kill.
my beliefs contradict the basic claims of satanism... thus i am a satanist!
not true. i'm wearing green my flesh is read. i'm not a water mellon!
***
All of which are compatable with satanism, thus none of my beliefs contradict the basic claims of satanism... thus i am a satanist!
not true. i'm wearing green my flesh is red. i'm not a water mellon!
Satanism worships Satan, as much as any holy religion worships God. Being a self-proclaimed satanist i can assure you that this is not true! Strictly speaking not true according to "my own version" of satanism...
Mainly, there are two biggest branches of satanism: Traditional satanism which usually conveys satan as an actual entity...
The other type of satanism is Philosophical satanism; One of the main founders of Philosophical satanism is Anton Lavey... I have to say, i admire Anton's insight, but never the less, Lavey is DOES NOT have a trademark on the word satanism; Therefore you cannot consider Lavey's views as definitive of satanism; To clear the air some people call Anton Lavey's version of satanism as "Laveyism"; And as much as Lavey has the right to have his own version of satanism, i do have the same right to have my own version! (ie. individualism)
Misinformation about satanism are spread widely by the churches, and other religious figures... Even traditional satanism isnt the way most people perceive it!
you have not been into rituals of it. I never did, and probably never will engage in a "ritual"; this doesnt make me less of a satanist! Same goes for joining a "Party", I will not join a party so as to reserve my individualism, but that doesnt make me less than members of parties
from what i read, i believe that you think for yourself. Yes! Lets not get lost in definitions and labels... Yes, i do think for myself, not buy what someone else tries to convince me of...
I highly respect your insight; Not only respect, but i find it truthful; I will admire that you read my views as "independent" views rather than associate them with a concept like satanism that you have prejudice about! Dont get caught with what i call -or what others call- my beliefs... What i think is the thing that matters, NOT what it is called.
i'm wearing green my flesh is read. i'm not a water mellon! But green on the outside and red on the inside is NOT the complete definition of water melon; If it was, then i'd argue that you would be actually a water melon!
Post a Comment