Replies

I believe in God and 'one' of the reasons is “The Absurdity of Life Without God”

I had a listen. Appeals to false dichotomy and appeal to the consequences. Throws in a nice little strawman, too.

It's a string of logical fallacies in an attempt to handwave a 'necessity' of a God to give our lives meaning by appealing to what he wants to be real (rather than what is demonstratably real), without actually demonstrating that a god of any sort exists. Bulds a story of gloom and doom regarding the eventual 'death' of the universe and then asserts that a god exists simply because we need hope.

Guess what. Wanting there to be a god does not mean that a god exists. It will take more than weak logical fallacies to convince me.

In some ways I feel bad about these continued threads about Dr. Dini. He is in no position to change the scientific community. Heck, I know people without BA's that have more grants under their belts (they're on his website).

I get emotionally charged when I think about the "student" that sat in on his class (non student in reality) and made a complaint. A poseur in the real sense.

But the most amusement I get, is the lack of standards I see, when a person can ask "What clinical medical practice or technique requires a belief in evolution?" Required belief is key. If there is not a clear case for the belief, and I do mean noncontroversial type clear, it is wrong. Many competant physicians are not evolutionists.

There are better tests for physician compentency. If you do not use them, your claim of scientist is in question.

DK
These threads are always strange.

Craig has not stated any ‘ultimate’ logical fallacy.
Thus (as you should agree), we have no ‘ultimate’ disagreement.
Since you temporally disagree (with me), apparently Nature has made this subject (to you) impurely subjective and without consequence. We are now left with the ‘ultimate’ - - - “So What?”

Now to Dini… Objectively speaking:

Anyone who doubts (but understands) the ‘theory of common descent’ is not competent for a job as a physician.
Is this statement true?

had a listen. Appeals to false dichotomy and appeal to the consequences. Throws in a nice little strawman, too. It's a string of logical fallacies in an attempt to handwave a 'necessity' of a God to give our lives meaning by appealing to what he wants to be real (rather than what is demonstratably real), without actually demonstrating that a god of any sort exists. Bulds a story of gloom and doom regarding the eventual 'death' of the universe and then asserts that a god exists simply because we need hope. Guess what. Wanting there to be a god does not mean that a god exists. It will take more than weak logical fallacies to convince me.

I listened to it to, and the rebuttal I was formulating in my head as I listened to it was pretty much exactly what I see you've already written. So just put me down for a "seconded".

Wishful thinking is a poor substitute for uncovering the facts, whatever they may be.