I pit I Love Me, Vol. 1

[Othersider]

@Uzi

Actually Zeus is just as made up as IPU and MSP, or God, for that matter.

That’s not necessarily true, and you know it.

[Uzi]

@Othersider

That’s not necessarily true, and you know it.

Meh, you’d be surprised at how little I know.

Proof of Zeus = written documents passed down from antiquity
Proof of IPU = Straight dope archives
Proof of MSP = Straight dope archives
Proof of God = written documents passed down from antiquity

I’m not trying to be a smart ass here, but what else is there that you can use to defend the supposition that there is a God other than those ancient writings? Because the last and final prophet was Mohammed and he died in the 7th century. Ain’t nobody around now who is claiming to see God and is taken seriously. Yet how do you know Mohammed was talking to God, or space aliens, or was dealing with an ‘undigested bit of beef’? Maybe he was just plain loopy. Same goes for all those previous to him.

[Contrapuntal]

@Polycarp

Anyone who has come to the conclusion, based on his own experiences and the weighting of the evidence purported to prove God’s existence, that He does not in fact exist, is reasoning logically. And so is anyone who, from the same resources, has come to the opposite conclusion. The value and relevance of the data is not germane to the logical process used to parse it.

But the thread title should properly have been, “I Pit I Love Me, Vol. I, Tip I”

I am assuming that the phrase “the weighting of the evidence…” is meant to be distinct from “based on his own experiences,” as the latter, of course, could only be persuasive to the individual. Respectfully, can you tell me what resources that I, as an atheist, and you, as a theist could reason with and reach opposite conclusions? Or have I misunderstood you?

[Merijeek]

@Uzi

Yet how do you know Mohammed was talking to God, or space aliens, or was dealing with an ‘undigested bit of beef’? Maybe he was just plain loopy. Same goes for all those previous to him.

As someone who is generally anti-religion, I’d like to point out that you would have been much funnier if you’d said “undigested bit of pork”.

-Joe Griffin

[Cisco]

@A Monkey With a Gun

::sigh

Uzi, kindly reread my last post. It’s a response to MaxTheVool. The premise behind the IPU argument is that if a claim is unprovable, then it’s in the same category as everything that is deliberately made up or fictionalized. It falsely redefines the opposing position in terms that make it more easily attackable, which causes it to tread damn near straw man territory. Couple this with the fact posters such as I Love Me, vo. I get pitted for using the IPU as an unelaborated ad hominem, and hopefully you will see why I proposed Monkey’s Law. I’m simply observing that the IPU almost never has a positive effect on the discusion, and things go downhill as fast as when someone compares another viewpoint to a characteristic of Nazi Germany.

Using Zeuss will improve the argument slightly in that Zeuss is not deliberately made up. It may also allow you to sidestep Monkey’s Law, but even with the change the argument will still be weak.

So, if you read Carl Sagan’s Demon Haunted World (and for all I know, you have), would you come here and pit Carl Sagan for talking about the dragon in his garage? It’s the same argument, and I think it has more weight than you realize.

[armedmonkey]

@Cisco

So, if you read Carl Sagan’s Demon Haunted World (and for all I know, you have), would you come here and pit Carl Sagan for talking about the dragon in his garage? It’s the same argument, and I think it has more weight than you realize.

Gaghhh.

That’s an “apeal to authority” argument. Classic fallacy. I dig Sagan, and may God rest his atheist soul. However, if you’re defending the IPU, you have to do better than “But Sagan used it!”. Tell us why and how he used it or shut the fuck up.

[MaxTheVool]

@A Monkey With a Gun

With all due respect, I think your missing my point. It is certainly possible to draw comparisons between an organization and the Nazi party using well thought reasoning. However, too often the word “Nazi” has been abused. Therefore, even if the comparison’s logic is impeccable, the mere mention of “Nazi” will cause the debate to spiral downward. This is the phenomenon recognized by Godwin’s Law.

My point was that the same is true for IPU and MSP. Too many people do use them as insults. A simple search of these boards will tell you that. Because many have turned what used to be a weak and tired (but at least honest) reductio ad absurdum argument into an ad hominem, even if the Invisible Pink Unicorn argument is offered sincerely, the mere mention of it causes many to roll their eyes and think, “Aw fuck, not this bullshit again.” I call this phenomenon “Monkey’s Law”.

So you’re not saying either:
(1) The IPU argument/analogy is invalid
or
(2) The IPU argument/analogy is so inherently offensive that, like Nazi Germany, it ought to be forevever out of bounds in all contexts for decent people

you’re just saying
(3) The IPU argument/analogy has been so frequently used on the SDMB as a cheap shot that it has lost all power

?

[Cisco]

@MaxTheVool

So you’re not saying either:
(1) The IPU argument/analogy is invalid
or
(2) The IPU argument/analogy is so inherently offensive that, like Nazi Germany, it ought to be forevever out of bounds in all contexts for decent people

you’re just saying
(3) The IPU argument/analogy has been so frequently used on the SDMB as a cheap shot that it has lost all power

?

I don’t think he really knows what he’s saying. He just wants his own “law” so he can live forever in infamy like Mike Godwin :rolleyes:.

[Voyager]

@furt

Interesting choice of words. In what sense do you use it? I’m assuming that you aren’t referring to violating a transcendant, universal standard of moral behavior?

Just wanted to keep it in the context of those who believe in sins. It was not a theological statement.

[Voyager]

@A Monkey With a Gun

With all due respect, I think your missing my point. It is certainly possible to draw comparisons between an organization and the Nazi party using well thought reasoning. However, too often the word “Nazi” has been abused. Therefore, even if the comparison’s logic is impeccable, the mere mention of “Nazi” will cause the debate to spiral downward. This is the phenomenon recognized by Godwin’s Law.

My point was that the same is true for IPU and MSP. Too many people do use them as insults. A simple search of these boards will tell you that. Because many have turned what used to be a weak and tired (but at least honest) reductio ad absurdum argument into an ad hominem, even if the Invisible Pink Unicorn argument is offered sincerely, the mere mention of it causes many to roll their eyes and think, “Aw fuck, not this bullshit again.” I call this phenomenon “Monkey’s Law”.

Some people use MSP as an insulting name for the God that others believe in. I can see a legitimate objection to that usage. No one has ever used the IPU as a name for God. I don’t recall ever seeing the IPU used, either here or in alt.atheism, as an insult. She is always used to make a serious point, which is that to atheists there is no more reason to believe in your god than in the IPU.

Since you don’t seem interested in addressing it, but just misquote Godwin’s Law, here are some suggestions.

• More people believe in my God than the IPU, so there. This does not explain why all those people who believe in Hindusim or Islam are wrong.

• The IPU is a funny name.

• No one really believes in the IPU. True, but plenty of people did believe in Zeus. Besides, unless you’re on Discworld, a god’s existence doesn’t depend on the number of believers.

• I’ve got proof of my god here in this old book. Show it. Or maybe you left the proof in your other pair of pants.

BTW, Cisco did not make an appeal to authority, but just cited a similar argument. You might try understanding the terms you use.

Poly, how about
*
Now I Pit I Love Me, Vol. I, Tip I Won *

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

@Voyager

Now I Pit I Love Me, Vol. I, Tip I Won *

And now I Pit I Love Me, Vol. I. Tip, I won DNA.

P.S. I meant the IPU thing quite seriously and was certainly not using it as an insulting name for ‘God’.

The IPU idea is more involved then some people seem to think. You shouldn’t just dismiss it. I have never seen or heard anyone make a convincing argument that the existence of ‘God’ is any more plausible than the existance of the IPU, MSP, or “Dragons In Sagan’s Closet.” <----- (band name-- D.I.S.C. for short)

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

That should be ‘existence’, of course.

Incidentally, the post from this thread that bought me this delightful Pitting where I wrote:

I don’t even want to spend my limited time here on Earth with a bunch of people who base their lives around fairy tales.

was simply a response to what Uzi wrote right before me:

Originally Posted by** Uzi**:

Would you want to spend eternity with a bunch of people who base their lives around fairy tales? Well neither does God.

I didn’t start the fairy tale thing… I just responded to it. OTOH, I have previously used the term “fairy tale” to refer to some religious ideas without any prodding from anyone else.

[furt]

@Voyager

Just wanted to keep it in the context of those who believe in sins. It was not a theological statement.

So what words would you use? Socially objectionable behavior? Manifestation of personality disorder?

[kaylasdad99]

I’m astounded that I Love Me, Vol. I has gotten away for so long with saying Othersider should be cut up in little bloody pieces and poured from a bucket over the side of a boat.

[Othersider]

@kaylasdad99

I’m astounded that I Love Me, Vol. I has gotten away for so long with saying Othersider should be cut up in little bloody pieces and poured from a bucket over the side of a boat.

Where did he say that?

[woodstockbirdybird]

@Othersider

Where did he say that?

He called you “chum” in his initial response in this thread.

[Othersider]

@woodstockbirdybird

He called you “chum” in his initial response in this thread.

I didn’t even catch that. Man, I’m out of it.

[Voyager]

@I Love Me

And now I Pit I Love Me, Vol. I. Tip, I won DNA.

P.S. I meant the IPU thing quite seriously and was certainly not using it as an insulting name for ‘God’.

The IPU idea is more involved then some people seem to think. You shouldn’t just dismiss it. I have never seen or heard anyone make a convincing argument that the existence of ‘God’ is any more plausible than the existance of the IPU, MSP, or “Dragons In Sagan’s Closet.” <----- (band name-- D.I.S.C. for short)

I don’t know anyone who has used IPU as an insulting name for god, actually. It’s used in the sense you just did. Of course many Christians think their god needs protection from us heathen, thus the blasphemy laws. Too bad their God lost the key to the lightning closet.

Furt: I have sinned by using the word sin. You have to be damned careful with your language around here.

[Uzi]

@Merijeek

As someone who is generally anti-religion, I’d like to point out that you would have been much funnier if you’d said “undigested bit of pork”.

-Joe Griffin

D’oh!