God Exists [W:114]

[Angel]

Read the post again.

Here, I'll save you having to scroll The lame example you're now trying to shift to in no way equates to the above. Seeing that it is lame, no surprise there either.

That lame example of mine comes from philosophy of language.

Anyway, the meaning of Maugham's quote concerns numbers, not the mole hill you're trying to make a mountain.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

To have a member of the Atheist Cult tell me that the logic is horrible is proof that the argument is correct. Thanks for acknowledging that.

Atheist cult? Sounds fun. Where do they meet?

 

[Manc Skipper]

Isn't that agnosticism, MS, rather than atheism?

No....

 

[Chagos]

That lame example of mine comes from philosophy of language.

Anyway, the meaning of Maugham's quote concerns numbers, not the mole hill you're trying to make a mountain.

to tell the difference between validity of a statement and validity of its content requires no philosophistry of language.

Maugham didn't say anything about people being foolish, he pointed out the common logical fallacy of arguing to popularity.

He doesn't even imply that numbers are concerned beyond their being large as amounting to zilch wrt validity (or quality) of any statement being made.

 

[Chagos]

Atheist cult? Sounds fun. Where do they meet?

World council of atheists.

Services held regularly on the hour, come Wednesdays.:mrgreen:

 

[Angel]

“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widely spread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.” Bertrand Russell.

Would you say that Russell and Maugham agree or disagree, based on the two quotes?

I'd say they agree.

If you agree that they agree, then my parody of Maugham will work with Russell as well. Let's see.

The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not sensible.

 

[Daisy]

While those numbers may be accurate, how anyone chooses to interpret them is variable.

If 32.5% of the world is Christian, 67.5% is not, meaning 67.5% of humans do not view Christianity as the truth, hence, Christians are in a minority there. Same with Islam and other religions. But, atheists fit right in with those who disbelieve the truth of a different religion. All of them are joined by one common denominator -- the disbelief that the other religion is the truth.

So, your numbers are probably right, but they certainly don't support the idea that anyone religion is correct. Rather, they disprove it.

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. Mark Twain

 

[Manc Skipper]

Would you say that Russell and Maugham agree or disagree, based on the two quotes?

I'd say they agree.

If you agree that they agree, then my parody of Maugham will work with Russell as well. Let's see.

The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not sensible.

Doesn't work with either.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. Mark Twain

That would depend. The majority with the invisible friend, or a particular flavour of friend?

 

[Chagos]

Would you say that Russell and Maugham agree or disagree, based on the two quotes?

I'd say they agree.

If you agree that they agree, then my parody of Maugham will work with Russell as well. Let's see.

Your parody didn't work at all, only one not realizing that having apparently been you.

The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not sensible.

Maugham would certainly agree with that but that does not remotely compare to the argument he made.
Which was, no matter how much you try to gish gallop away,

"If 50 million people say something foolish, it's still foolish."

 

[Chagos]

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. Mark Twain

Did you actually understand that?

Because if you did, you'd be making a case for a Christian majority (if and where it exists) to cause any adherent to better start doubting.

 

[Angel]

to tell the difference between validity of a statement and validity of its content requires no philosophistry of language.

Maugham didn't say anything about people being foolish, he pointed out the common logical fallacy of arguing to popularity.

He doesn't even imply that numbers are concerned beyond their being large as amounting to zilch wrt validity (or quality) of any statement being made.

Yes, that's what I said -- numbers = popularity. And Maugham did say something about foolishness. He uses the word twice. What he said is that foolishness is not cancelled by popularity.

If popularity is no measure of validity, then it is no measure of validity. Period.
Therefore, popularity is no measure of invalidity. And that was my point in turning Maugham's quote against itself.

 

[Chagos]

That would depend. The majority with the invisible friend, or a particular flavour of friend?

I suspect she doesn't know how unsuitable the quote is for making whatever point she had in mind.

 

[Angel]

Your parody didn't work at all, only one not realizing that having apparently been you.

Maugham would certainly agree with that but that does not remotely compare to the argument he made.
Which was, no matter how much you try to gish gallop away,

"If 50 million people say something foolish, it's still foolish."

And if 6 billion people say something sensible, it's still sensible.

It's funny watching you being illogical under the mantle of logic, Chagos. But Maugham's point is a double-edged sword. You're only looking at the edge you like. Meanwhile the other edge is slicing off your gish gallop.

 

[Daisy]

Did you actually understand that?

Because if you did, you'd be making a case for a Christian majority (if and where it exists) to cause any adherent to better start doubting.

Look again, Einstein...

Christians: 2,100,000,000 - tending to decline in terms of global percentage

Major World Religions populations pie chart statistics list

 

[Angel]

You don't have to believe god does not exist, only that the evidence for it's existence is insufficient to do so.

Isn't that agnosticism, MS, rather than atheism?

No....

Yes...

Since we disagree on terms, shouldn't we define them?

 

[Daisy]

Of course then there's this...

Of no religion: 1,100,000,000 - tending to decline in terms of global percentage

 

[Chagos]

Yes, that's what I said -- numbers = popularity. And Maugham did say something about foolishness. He uses the word twice. What he said is that foolishness is not cancelled by popularity.

If popularity is no measure of validity, then it is no measure of validity. Period.
Therefore, popularity is no measure of invalidity. And that was my point in turning Maugham's quote against itself.

appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy when that alone is used to substantiate the validity of an argument.

Do you understand "alone"?

Using the argument of (many) others sharing into an argued take (behavior, stance, definition, belief etc.) as assumed proof of any of those being of merit, doesn't cut it where logic is concerned. The fallacy of "argumentum ad populum" arises when it is used as sole measure of (supposed) substantiation. IOW it's an illogical argument.

Therefore, popularity is no measure of invalidity.

when used in the method we're talking about here, of course it is.

Invalidity of argument.

 

[Chagos]

Look again, Einstein...

Christians: 2,100,000,000 - tending to decline in terms of global percentage

Major World Religions populations pie chart statistics list

Of course then there's this...

Of no religion: 1,100,000,000 - tending to decline in terms of global percentage

Do you actually understand the significance of "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."

???

Here, let me try it from another angle.

IF Christians actually made up 50.01 pct of the world population, it would be time for them to start doubting.

That appears to be the argument you're making.

 

[Daisy]

Do you actually understand the significance of "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."

???

Any way you slice and dice it, Christianity is not in the majority...:roll:

 

[Daisy]

Do you actually understand the significance of "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."

???

Here, let mew try it from another angle.

IF Christians actually made up 50.01 pct of the world population, it would be time for them to start doubting.

That appears to be the argument you're making.

And no...If I was the only believer left on the earth, I would not start doubting, Einstein...that is how sure I am...

 

[Angel]

appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy when that alone is used to substantiate the validity of an argument.

Do you understand "alone"?

Using the argument of (many) others sharing into an argued take (behavior, stance, definition, belief etc.) as assumed proof of any of those being of merit, doesn't cut it where logic is concerned. The fallacy of "argumentum ad populum" arises when it is used as sole measure of (supposed) substantiation. IOW it's an illogical argument. when used in the method we're talking about here, of course it is.

Invalidity of argument.

Look, man, I'm not about to instruct you in logic. Pay attention. The fallacy you keep citing is an informal fallacy that says popularity is not alone a valid argument. Maugham's quote relies on that informal fallacy to point out that foolishness is foolishness whatever its popularity. Got that?

Now I turned his use of the informal fallacy around and used it in the case of sensibleness (truth in my original post, but it comes to the same thing). Now pay attention. If popularity is no argument against foolishness, then popularity is no argument against sensibleness. What is foolish is foolish whatever its popularity, and what is sensible is sensible whatever its popularity.

That is the logic of the case whether you are able to see it or not, and whether you like it or not.

Foolishness and sensibleness are what they are whatever the numbers say.

Got it?

 

[Chagos]

Any way you slice and dice it, Christianity is not in the majority...:roll:

I've meanwhile edited my post to include this:

Here, let me try it from another angle.

IF Christians actually made up 50.01 pct of the world population, it would be time for them to start doubting.

That appears to be the argument you're making.

As to Christians being in the majority, show me where I ever claimed that.

Quite apart from that having nothing to do with your abuse of a Langhorne musing, to so inadequately make a point that you're actually defeating all by yourself.

 

[Chagos]

And no...If I was the only believer left on the earth, I would not start doubting, Einstein...that is how sure I am...

So why did you quote ole Samuel on the merits of doubt when one find oneself in majority anywhere?

Oh I get it, as the only believer on earth you'd in no way be in any majority.

 

[Daisy]

I've meanwhile edited my post to include this:

As to Christians being in the majority, show me where I ever claimed that.

Quite apart from that having nothing to do with your abuse of a Langhorne musing, to so inadequately make a point that you're actually defeating all by yourself.

Let me see if I can break it down simple enough for you to comprehend...the majority of the world's pop. is not Christian...got that?

In that case, if you are in the majority...which is not Christian...you should start reflecting on what you believe...got that? If not, I can't break it down any simpler...:roll: