Session 2 - Logic in Apologetics - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Session 2 - Logic in Apologetics

In this session we will examine one of the main areas of philosophy, logic.

We will look at identifying logical fallacies inside statements (with examples from apologetic questions)

We will also look at different ways to

prove things trueSlide2

The purpose of logic is the examine the claims made in epistemology, to see if

they are true or falseMany of these logical fallacies and laws will be very familiar to you, and easy to identify… But others will not be

Let’s look at these fallacies and how

to identify themSlide3

Ad Hominem Argument

Also, "personal attack," "poisoning the well." The fallacy of attempting to refute an argument by attacking the opposition’s personal character or reputation

Example: You are so stupid your argument

couldn't

possibly be true.

Example

:

I

figured that you couldn't possibly get it right, so I ignored your comment.Slide4

In Apologetics

My opponent went to an unaccredited college, therefore his argument is wrong

These arguments are fairly easy to spot, when one side of the debates decides to attack his opponent instead of the arguments he presented

Happens all the time in Creation vs.

Evolution debatesSlide5

This is a conclusion based on the premise that if A happens, then eventually through a series of small steps, through B, C,..., X, Y, Z will happen, too, basically equating A and Z. So, if we don't want Z to occur, A must not be allowed to occur either.

Slippery Slope

This is easy to fall into! Christians do

it just as oftenSlide6

Direct TV had a great example

1. When your cable company puts you on hold, you get angry. 2

. When you get angry, you go blow-off steam. 3. When you go blow-off steam, accidents happen. 4. When accidents happen, you get an eye-patch. 5. When you get an eye-patch, people think you’re tough. 

6

. When people think you’re tough, people want to see how tough. 

7

. And when people want to see how tough, you wake-up in a roadside ditch. 

8

. Don’t wake-up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of cable. Slide7

If we ban Hummers because they are bad for the environment eventually the government will ban all cars, so we should not ban Hummers.

Things non-Christians tag as slippery slopes:

If we legalize homosexual marriage that means we will eventually let people marry their mom or dad or brother or sisterSlide8

Slippery Slopes they end up in

If we allow creationism to be taught in public schools as an alternative to evolution, the next thing you know they’ll teach a flat earth and a solid sky as an alternative to modern cosmology.

If they restrict pornography today, tomorrow they will take away all of your freedom of speech.Slide9

This is a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence. In other words, you are rushing to a conclusion before you have all the relevant facts. Example

:

Hasty GeneralizationEven though it's only the first day, I can tell this is going to be a boring course

.

Another easy one to fall intoSlide10

Some of the Christians I met are hypocritical. Therefore

, all Christians are hypocrites.

An atheist I met made some very irrational arguments. Therefore, most atheists are

irrational.

Popular examples that come up

Don’t be hasty to generalize Slide11

Cause and Effect Fallacy

I drank bottled water and now I am sick, so the water must have made me sick.

This is a conclusion that assumes that if 'A' occurred after 'B' then 'B' must have caused 'A.'

Example:Slide12

Apologetic example:

1. One of the Protestant movement's most important doctrines is Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). 

2. The Protestant denominations have since fragmented. Therefore, Sola Scriptura causes denominational splitting.

You can’t actually show a cause and effect relationship, it is possible, but not provableSlide13

Genetic Fallacy

Attempting to endorse or disqualify a claim because of the origin or irrelevant history

of the claimThe Nazi regime developed the Volkswagen Beetle.  Therefore, you should not buy a VW Beetle because of who started it.

Example:Slide14

In Apologetics

Something that is often told to Christians is: “Most Christians are believers because their parents were

.”Often the point is to disprove Christianity… How does that do it? Just because your parents were believers and you were raised believing it doesn’t make it wrong? That’s not a valid argument against anything Slide15

Begging the Claim

The conclusion that the writer should prove is validated within the claim.

Filthy and polluting coal should be banned.

Example:

You can’t just assert your position that coal is filthy and polluting… that’s the debateSlide16

Example:

The Pope is the head of the true church on earth because he is the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

The scientific theory of evolution should be taught in public schools and not the religious views of creation

Whether you believe that or not, just saying it doesn’t prove itSlide17

Circular Argument

George Bush is a good communicator because he speaks effectively.

This restates the argument rather than actually proving it

Example:

These can be hard to catch at times,

here’s an example in apologeticsSlide18

1. The Gospels contain several prophecies of the Fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple. 

2. Any supposed prophecy of an event that actually occurred was probably written in hindsight. 3. The Romans attacked and destroyed Jerusalem (including the Temple) in 70 A.D. (i.e. Mat 23:37, 38; Mark 13:1-3). 

Therefore, the Gospels were probably written after 70 A.D.Slide19

Disjunctive Syllogism

This fallacy is assuming that two (or more) propositions are mutually exclusive, that is, at most one of them is true; but that has yet to be demonstrated.

1. It is either raining, or it is not. 2. It is raining. 

Therefore

, "It is not raining" is

untrue.

Good example:Slide20

Example in Apologetics

1. Either God is sovereign or man has free will

2. God is sovereign. Therefore, free will doesn't exist.

The

conclusion would only follow from premise 2 if the two propositions in

premise

1 were shown to be truly

mutually

exclusive.Slide21

Either/or

This is a conclusion that oversimplifies the argument by reducing it to only two sides

or choices.We can either stop using coal fire plants

or destroy

the earth

.

Example:

Is it possible there’s another option?Slide22

Red Herring

This is a diversionary tactic that avoids the key issues, often by avoiding opposing arguments rather than addressing them

I know your car isn't working right.  But, if you had gone to the store one day earlier, you'd not be having problems.

Example:Slide23

I would support the President with the

War in Iraq, but I don't like his policy on the economy.

If we teach creationism in public schools our technological advancements will fall behind compared to other countries, isn’t technology important to our economy?

Examples in Apologetics

Red herrings are everywhere in debateSlide24

Straw Man

This move oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument.

Mom: The doctor says that these exercises will help you recover more quickly

.

Son

: Aw, Mom! Do I have to look like Arnold Schwarzsengger?Slide25

Special Pleading (double standard)

Applying a standard to another that is different from a standard applied to oneself.

Example:

You can't possibly understand menopause because you are a man.

Those rules don't apply to me since I am older than you.Slide26

Example in apologetics:

Often times when someone brings something up that you can’t answer as a Christian, they say that means you are wrong (after all, you can’t explain something)

However, when you bring up to an atheist that they can’t explain the origin of life, they say they’re still studying itSlide27

Poisoning the Well (form of Ad Hominem)

Presenting negative information about a person before he/she speaks so as to discredit the person's argument.

Example:

Frank is pompous, arrogant, and thinks he knows everything.  So, let's hear what Frank has to say about the subjectSlide28

Appeal to Popularity/Majority

Urging the hearer to accept a position because a majority of people hold to it.

Example:

Everyone else is doing it.  Why shouldn't you?

Just because the majority does or does not believe something doesn’t have any bearing on the truth of the statementSlide29

Example in Apologetics

The majority of scientists believe in evolution, therefore you should too

This also happens on the flip side though

The majority of the world population believe in God or gods (theism) therefore God (or gods) must exist

The majority doesn’t prove itSlide30

Many other fallacies do exist

Loaded Question

"Why is George W. Bush so blood thirsty?"

Appeal to Authority

“Scholars say…” Therefore it must be true?

Appeal to Tradition

It’s the way we’ve been doing it for yearsSlide31

Two types of reasoning

Deductive reasoning (Sherlock)

 In the process of deduction, you begin with some statements, called 'premises', that are assumed to be true, you then determine what else would have to be true if the premises are true.

Deductive reasoning leads to truth

with certaintySlide32

All men are mortal. Joe is a man. Therefore Joe is mortal. If the first two statements are true, then the conclusion must be true.

Example of deductive reasoning

Bachelor's are unmarried men. Bill is unmarried. Therefore, Bill is a bachelor.

Both these things are true if the

premises are correctSlide33

Inductive reasoning (Psych)

In the process of induction, you begin with some data, and then determine what general conclusion(s) can logically be derived from those data

In other words, you determine what theory or theories could explain the data.

With inductive reasoning you get truth

to a degree of probabilitySlide34

Examples:

This marble from the bag is black. That marble from the bag is black. A third (all the way to one hundred) marbles

from the bag are all black. Therefore all the marbles in the bag black. 

While from the data that we have it sure seems unlikely that a red marble is in there, we don’t know for sureSlide35

Some apologetic examples:

An argument to prove atheists can’t exist by deductive reason

1) To be an atheist is to claim that there is absolutely, positively NO God (to claim ignorance is agnosticism

)

2) To know absolutely, positively that there is no God, then one has to have all information about ALL

things Slide36

3) To have such knowledge would make one God. (being omniscience)

Therefore the only one who could be a

true atheist would be God.

Is it a good argument? Are any of the premises wrong? If none of the

premises are incorrect, than the

conclusion is correctSlide37

When you come across an argument, your goal is to look at the premises and see if any of them are false

Premise 1: God is all loving

Premise 2: God is all Powerful Premise 3: An all loving being would stop suffering whenever they could

Conclusion

: Therefore God is either not all loving or not all powerful

Any problems?Slide38

We will look at other examples throughout this class of deductive (and inductive) reasoning that supports God and Christianity

Do your best to familiarize yourself with the different logical fallacies and keep your eye open for them in conversations. They happen all the time! Most people just don’t know how to identify them.Slide39

Memory Verse

Isaiah 1:18A: "Come now, and let us reason together," Says the

LORD”