# Fallacies get imprinted young... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 24, 2005, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237 "2005-05-24T07:20:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Greathouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greathouse/32/2992_2.png) [@Greathouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greathouse)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/101 "2005-05-24T16:28:49Z")
:smack: Damnit! Brett Favre…I spelled it wrong ever single time in that last post. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/102 "2005-05-24T16:38:56Z")
That’s what it all comes down to, eh? “God moves in mysterious ways.” It’s like that episode of the Simpsons. > [@The Simpsons](#): > > **Frink:** Yes, over here, n’hey, n’hey. In episode BF12, you were battling barbarians while riding a winged Appaloosa, yet in the very next scene, my dear, you’re clearly atop a winged Arabian. Please do explain it. > > **Lawless:** Ah, yeah, well, whenever you notice something like that, a wizard did it. The phrase “God moves in mysterious ways” is the clearest indication there is that faith involves a relinquishing of reason - we can believe in a deity who does horrible things (per the Old Testament), who allows horrible things to happen, and yet who is at the same time the source of all that is good. When the football team loses, they didn’t play well enough. But when they win? It was Jesus. :: shrugs :: I’ll continue to use my own judgment. After all, if there _is_ a God, He gave me judgment and reason for some purpose, and it wasn’t to give them up and believe in this little girl’s simplistic Big-Sky-Daddy when all the evidence is against it. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/103 "2005-05-24T16:39:08Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Some folks would prefer not to have their lives ruled by superstition. Many of them feel that religous appeals, or appeals to “God,” fall into that category. What concerns them is that such thinking can come to have a powerful effect on public policy, and even the way society is constructed. It therefore frustrates them when they see evidence of such ways of thought in someone as young as eight years old. I sympathize with that and do not begrudge their cautions and suspicions. However, if they want to influence public policy, it would behoove them to stop insulting 90% of the public with categorical declarations about faith in God equating to hypocrisy. Not every Christian is out to ostracize atheists, but surely you can understand how being insulted simply for what you believe wears thin damn quick. Especially when what you believe is summarized and caricatured by people who haven’t the first clue about its depth or complexity. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/104 "2005-05-24T16:40:28Z")
I should specify that by “faith” I was only actually discussing the sort of simple-minded Christianity that blames the fire on man but doesn’t credit the firefighters who put it out. I have nothing against other more rational religions, or more nuanced, sensible forms of Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/105 "2005-05-24T16:41:26Z")
**Liberal:** \* If God is responsible for every event in your life — including the buttons on your shirt — then everything you’re saying now is on His behalf. It is He speaking, and not you.\* Right. But if God is responsible for **any** event in your life, then He is responsible to the same extent for **every** event in your life. To the extent that an omniscient omnipotent God is responsible for the good things that happen to you, He is also responsible for the bad things that happen to you. Your analogies attempting to resolve this dilemma aren’t adequate because they reduce God’s role to that of a seamstress or a maid: someone who can do some positive things herself, but is helpless to prevent you from wiping out their effects by doing negative things. There’s just no logically convincing way out of the contradictory combination of an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent God and the existence of evil—at least not in terms of humanly comprehensible concepts of causality and responsibility. Sure, we can fall back on “mysterious ways” arguments to justify thanking God for the good stuff while not holding Him responsible for the bad stuff, and I don’t care if we do. But it can’t be made logically justifiable according to our ordinary understanding of the terms. I explained above why I think logical quibbling about theological abstractions fundamentally misses the point of religious belief, but we can’t deny that according to the premises they’re using, the quibblers have a valid argument. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/106 "2005-05-24T16:41:45Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > but surely you can understand how being insulted simply for what you believe wears thin damn quick. Especially when what you believe is summarized and caricatured by people who haven’t the first clue about its depth or complexity. No, **Liberal** , us nonreligious types in a nation that’s 90% Christian surely can’t understand this feeling at all. Not in the slightest. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/107 "2005-05-24T16:42:13Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > I should specify that by “faith” I was only actually discussing the sort of simple-minded Christianity that blames the fire on man but doesn’t credit the firefighters who put it out. I have nothing against other more rational religions, or more nuanced, sensible forms of Christianity. Thank you. That makes a huge difference, and your causes would be helped greatly, I believe, if you remembered always to draw that differentiation. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/108 "2005-05-24T16:42:24Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I sympathize with that and do not begrudge their cautions and suspicions. However, if they want to influence public policy, it would behoove them to stop insulting 90% of the public with categorical declarations about faith in God equating to hypocrisy. Not every Christian is out to ostracize atheists, but surely you can understand how being insulted simply for what you believe wears thin damn quick. Especially when what you believe is summarized and caricatured by people who haven’t the first clue about its depth or complexity. Yes, I certainly can understand that. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/109 "2005-05-24T16:44:41Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I guess you think calling me stupid makes you look smart. Only so much as you shutting your eyes and jamming your fingers in your ears makes you pious. [/QUOTE] To summarize the argument for those too stubborn to see it… Two possiblitiies: 1. Omniscient Omnipotent God. Allows bad things to happen. Sat back and said, “Meh” while girl was raped, beaten, and dumped. Decided to get off his ass later and “miracle” a rescue. Could have stopped it from happening in the first place but didn’t. 2. Non-Omniscient non-Omnipotent God. Doesn’t influence anything whatsoever. Girl is raped, beaten, and dumped due to BadGuy’s free will. Girl rescued due to dilligent work by Police Officer and his free will. In case #1 God could have stopped the entire event but didn’t. Allowed the suffering to happen. In case #2 God had nothing to do with any of it including the rescue, and therefore he shouldn’t get any credit for it. Which is it? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/110 "2005-05-24T16:45:52Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Right. But if God is responsible for any event in your life, then He is responsible to the same extent for every event in your life. I don’t think God is responsible for any moral event. Those choices are ours alone. All I’ve said in that regard is that, without God, a choice of goodness would not exist. It is one thing to leave a gift at your door, and quite another to strap it to your back with an unbreakable chain. > [@](#): > > I explained above why I think logical quibbling about theological abstractions fundamentally misses the point of religious belief, but we can’t deny that according to the premises they’re using, the quibblers have a valid argument. And I’ve explained why their premises are false. ---
**Author:** ![Greathouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greathouse/32/2992_2.png) [@Greathouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greathouse)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/111 "2005-05-24T16:46:42Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Some folks would prefer not to have their lives ruled by superstition. Many of them feel that religous appeals, or appeals to “God,” fall into that category. What concerns them is that such thinking can come to have a powerful effect on public policy, and even the way society is constructed. It therefore frustrates them when they see evidence of such ways of thought in someone as young as eight years old. Ok, but I imagine that most people are like me, in that a lot of what they believed when they were eight years old has either changed or been dropped completely as they grew older. She is an eight year old girl who has just been through something that I, as a 31 year old man, can’t even imagine (and don’t want to try). If it makes her feel better and possibly begin her healing process then I can’t fault her for contacting her Pastor for spiritual guidance and to thank her God. It affects me not one bit. When she becomes an adult, if she then starts trying to force some religious agenda, then she should be taken to task. But not for simply trying to find comfort in her God as she knows him. YMMV, and all that. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/112 "2005-05-24T16:47:33Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Yes, I certainly can understand that. Thanks. So far, I’ve been called hypocritical, stupid, and now stubborn. Your mercy of empathy is greatly appreciated. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/113 "2005-05-24T16:49:06Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Faulty premise. God is the agent Who facilitates goodness. There is no evil in Him. How then can He be accountable when a free moral agent chooses to do evil? Again I ask, if God is the controller of a man’s every decision, then why is it you are not now writing what He has compelled you to write? And if He is not forcing your hand, then why was He forcing the hand of the rapist? He’s not forcing my hand because he doesn’t exist. Your logic, however, is as flawed as it could possibly be. If he is infallibly good, then why does he allow bad things to happen to innocents? Why did he allow evil at all? He _is_ evil if he has the capability to stop bad things but chooses not to. You agree that he has _chosen_ to allow bad things to happen, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/114 "2005-05-24T16:51:56Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Could you guys appoint a spokesperson? > > No, God does not choose our good acts any more than He chooses our evil acts. But what is the harm in a little girl thanking God that a man chose a good act? As I said, that’s the part I don’t get. Why do you begrudge this girl’s gratitude for her good fortune? Because it is misplaced gratitude. Thank the cop that had the sharp eye to see her little hand and dig her out of her grave. The harm is that it is bullshit and she should put credit where credit is due. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/115 "2005-05-24T16:52:48Z")
Can someone explain to me what the difference is between an omniscient, omnipotent, undetectable god with his own ineffable plan and that of _no god whatsoever_ is? I mean, on one hand, we’ve got the god-creature that is supposedly responsible for everything but which is using every power at his infinite disposal to hide from any possible form of detection- even so far as to only be responsible for positive outcomes, and never the negatives (since, according to **Lib** , all negative outcomes are simply positive results _that we can’t see_. On the other hand, we have a universe that seems to run itself just fine without any sort of deity. What’s the difference? On the main topic, I don’t want to pit the young girl. She’s been through a hellish experience, and I’m glad she survived it. I do want to pit, however, the religion that taught her that God is only responsible for the positive outcomes. It’s not her fault that she’s been taught to think this way- it’s the fault of the religion, one which teaches its adherents “If something bad happens to you, it’s someone else’s fault. If something good happens to you, no matter who SEEMS to have done it, it’s because God likes you.” THAT’S bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/116 "2005-05-24T16:52:49Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Thank you. That makes a huge difference, and your causes would be helped greatly, I believe, if you remembered always to draw that differentiation. I don’t really see why - while I’m on record as being somewhat opposed to the rise of the Religious Right in the United States (in much the same way that Noam Chomsky is “somewhat opposed” to military unilateralism), I’m hardly given to kneejerk anti-religious sentiments. In fact, I spend a lot more time arguing with folks like **Scott Plaid** that religion is _not_ something to be condemned. I don’t think that’s a fair thing for you to imply at all. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/117 "2005-05-24T16:56:09Z")
> [@Greathouse](#): > > Ok, but I imagine that most people are like me, in that a lot of what they believed when they were eight years old has either changed or been dropped completely as they grew older. She is an eight year old girl who has just been through something that I, as a 31 year old man, can’t even imagine (and don’t want to try). If it makes her feel better and possibly begin her healing process then I can’t fault her for contacting her Pastor for spiritual guidance and to thank her God. It affects me not one bit. When she becomes an adult, if she then starts trying to force some religious agenda, then she should be taken to task. But not for simply trying to find comfort in her God as she knows him. YMMV, and all that. You are essentially denying the premise of the OP, which is that “fallacies get imprinted young.” I happen to be more or less in the same camp; i.e., as the twig is bent… Yours is by no means an unreasonable position. > [@Liberal](#): > > Thanks. So far, I’ve been called hypocritical, stupid, and now stubborn. Your mercy of empathy is greatly appreciated. You’re welcome. It is a small enough gift, but I am glad to give it. And although small, sometimes it’s all I have to give. ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/118 "2005-05-24T16:59:51Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I guess you think calling me stupid makes you look smart. He’s saying that you have chosen exceptionally poor metaphors with which to make your point. See my above post for a few reasons why. > [@Liberal](#): > > Ridiculous. If God is responsible for every event in your life — including the buttons on your shirt — then everything you’re saying now is on His behalf. It is He speaking, and not you. Yup. God could reach His awesome pinky into my spinal cord and poke certain nerve endings. Hell, he could simply flip the off switch on the computer. Everything that we do, we do with God’s approval. After all, He could stop us, and it’s not like He doesn’t know about it. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/119 "2005-05-24T17:00:19Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I don’t think God is responsible for any moral event. Those choices are ours alone. All I’ve said in that regard is that, without God, a choice of goodness would not exist. It is one thing to leave a gift at your door, and quite another to strap it to your back with an unbreakable chain. Wait a sec. Are you saying that, if God didn’t exist, humans would be incapable of making ethical and moral choices? You seem a logical sort. Isn’t that an impossible-to-prove assertion? I don’t believe in God. Daily, however, I make ethical decisions. If the mere existence of God is enough to allow me to make those decisions, then why bother worshipping him/her/it? Why bother _believing_? Or are you saying that unbelievers are incapable of making proper ethical choices? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237/120 "2005-05-24T17:08:32Z")
**Liberal:** \*I don’t think God is responsible for any moral event. Those choices are ours alone. \* Fair enough, but in that case, thanking God for good things is no more valid than blaming Him for bad things. **Liberal:** \*All I’ve said in that regard is that, without God, a choice of goodness would not exist. \* Okay. But since God created all things, without God, a choice of evil would not exist either. There is simply no logical way to have God be the sole source of everything in existence without making Him equally responsible for evil and for good. **Liberal:** _And I’ve explained why their premises are false._ Then I guess I didn’t understand your explanation. The “seamstress” and “maid” analogies seem flawed to me, because they rely on metaphorically diminishing God’s capacity to prevent human evil, which contradicts the doctrine of God’s omnipotence. Now, if you’re actually **not** arguing for God’s omnipotence, then I totally see where you’re coming from. IMHO a very rational case could be made for a Deity who is omnibenevolent but not omnipotent: basically, one who is always trying to promote good and eradicate evil, and sometimes succeeds but sometimes fails. In that case, we can argue that thanking God for good things is appropriate because it shows appreciation for His efforts on our behalf, but it’s mean to criticize Him for His failure to prevent some bad things, because He’s doing the best He can. I like the loving and understanding attitude to the problem of God and evil implied by such a doctrine, although it still wouldn’t convince me to become a theist. However, I’m afraid it flatly contradicts some fairly basic Christian assumptions about God’s unlimited powers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fallacies-get-imprinted-young/305237.md?page=7)