Usage in referring to a type of argument
The term God-of-the-gaps fallacy can refer to a position that assumes an act of God as the explanation for an unknown phenomenon, which is a variant of an argument from ignorance fallacy.[13][14] Such an argument is sometimes reduced to the following form:
*There is a gap in understanding of some aspect of the natural world.
*Therefore the cause must be supernatural.
One example of such an argument, which uses God as an explanation of one of the current gaps in biological science, is as follows: "Because current science can't figure out exactly how life started, it must be God who caused life to start." Critics of intelligent design creationism, for example, have accused proponents of using this basic type of argument.[15]
God-of-the-gaps arguments have been discouraged by some theologians who assert that such arguments tend to relegate God to the leftovers of science: as scientific knowledge increases, the dominion of God decreases.[4][5][16][17]
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument
ie,
Exactly. I believe in God because I've seen the miraculous, I've studied both His Word and science, I've seen the change He has brought to my life and the lives of numerous others. All point to only one reasoned conclusion - God. I've looked at the other theories and they are so full of holes that it made me shake my head that people believe them (this was before I believed).This is a giant strawman. No theologian argues "we don't know, therefore God". Our knowledge level is irrelevant to the argument.
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument
ie,
No, YOUR post is the strawman.This is a giant strawman. No theologian argues "we don't know, therefore God". Our knowledge level is irrelevant to the argument.
This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.faithful_servant said:Exactly. I believe in God because I've seen the miraculous, I've studied both His Word and science, I've seen the change He has brought to my life and the lives of numerous others. All point to only one reasoned conclusion - God. I've looked at the other theories and they are so full of holes that it made me shake my head that people believe them (this was before I believed).
No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues.
This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven;t seen "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evdience of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps#Usage_in_referring_to_a_type_of_argument
ie,
That was really funny.If you're going to deliberately pick weak arguments by ignorant people to refute, you can expect to be called out on it.
There is NO god in evidence TO understand. That is a baseLess assumption and the point of this string.Why don't we just agree that we do not know, do know that it is probably -at least based on today#s level of scientific achievement- always going to be outside of our capabilities to understand God, the Universe and Everything.
:lamo<snip>
That was really funny.
YOU Disingenuously (or with an obtuse/religious read) accused me of strawman while you did it Blatantly.
As to who uses it, even theologians, in fact do, and you Still did!
Like the Fish in the Bowl above, you assume the 'cause' is... god/dog.
We don't know the cause/know the cause yet.. or if it's, ie, just part of some larger continuum.
There is NO god in evidence TO understand. That is a baseLess assumption and the point of this string.
An assumption that in every case we do have a verdict on, has been shown to be Bogus (Fire, Lightning, etc)
So then you must Also find all these hundreds of [contradictory] religions and gods rather humorous, and obviously in vast majority (if not all) false.I think anyone rather odd that thinks humanity capable at this time of deciding the question of the existence of a Creat/or or Her absence. Actually, there is even a mathematical proof that we cannot understand that much, as we are a subset of a very much larger reality and subsets cannot understand the whole. But, of course, Kurt Gödel might have been wrong.
The God of the Gaps is an interesting link but has little to do with the cartoon you sent along with it, nor as simplistic as the 'rationales' you included.This is probably THEE #1 rationale for those arguing for a god on msg bods.
"Well then, how did all this stuff just appear?"
If we can't explain it/explain it yet, it must be 'god.'
The same bogus/failed 'logic' used for creating Fire, Lightning, Sun, Fertility, and Ten thousand other 'gods.'
Personal experiences can certainly lead to a 'faith' otherwise never experienced. Perhaps your own ideas might change if you also experienced one of these 'anecdotes'.No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues. This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
Like the Fish in the Bowl above, you assume the 'cause' is... god/dog.
Let's not confuse religions with God.So then you must Also find all these hundreds of [contradictory] religions and gods rather humorous, and obviously in vast majority (if not all) false.
EDIT" to the below post from Grant that is unexplained, obtuse, and unanswerable. (not worth another separate post)
The Cartoon has EVERYTHING To do with God of the Gaps thinking. Real replies gladly answered.
The actual argument is basically:
1. Things can either exist by logical necessity or by contingency.
2. If a thing is contingent, then something must cause it to exist rather than not exist.
3. Consequently, there must be a cause of contingent things, which is not itself contingent.
4. Thus there is a necessary being, who caused the existence of all contingent beings.
All your posts were Disingenuous, Goofy, Strawman, and only 'axiomatic' if allowed certain premises/conclusions NOT in evidence: IOW, more God of the Gaps.All my assumptions were axiomatic and clearly outlined. If you can't read then that's your own problem.
You seem to have some very strong beliefs here, all of which are based on your faith.All your posts were Disingenuous, Goofy, Strawman, and only 'axiomatic' if allowed certain premises/conclusions NOT in evidence: IOW, more God of the Gaps/Craps.
I love shredding your rigid nonsense.
4 doesn't flow from 3. That's a logical leap to claim a being caused it all
certain premises/conclusions NOT in evidence
What do you think the word "being" means?
So then you must Also find all these hundreds of [contradictory] religions and gods rather humorous, and obviously in vast majority (if not all) false.
EDIT: to the below post from Grant that is unexplained, obtuse, and unanswerable. (not worth another separate post)
The Cartoon has EVERYTHING To do with God of the Gaps thinking. Real replies gladly answered.
EDIT II to Grant's second logically Empty second post below. Also not worthy of reply.
Some form of entity/organism/living thing.
No, YOUR post is the strawman.
I said it as "thee #1 argument on msg boards", you reply "No theologian" uses it!
(my link even said "some" theologians discourage it)
How Obtuse or Disingenuous/Dishonest!
YOUR strawman reply accusing someone else of... strawman!
The Paleocon legend/Disaster continues.
This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
What?At least an other mathematician showed that believing was rationally the optimum decision to the No-Belief/Belief matrix, while there is no reason to believe that there is no superior Knowledge that explains the compatibility of a myriad of beliefs that escapes small intelligences like ours.
I'm interested in Logical discusssion. You want to chat about, ie, your friend Ernie who was a drug addict and found a new addiction - religion - and is now doing much better.. as "proof" there is a god.faithful servant said:Got it!! YOu're not interested in conversation, just your version of evangelism... Mind closed and locked.mbig said:This is another Fallacy, argument by [personal] Anecdote.
You haven't seen [supernatural] "miracles", you have seen good and bad, and because of FAITH (aka baseless belief) you have chosen to call the good fortune/heads 'god', and confuse the the good effect 'faith' might have on wayward lives, with there actually being an Object OF that faith. IOW, no more than 'positive thinking'.
There is NO evidence of god, and your Myopic anecdotes certainly don't rise to such.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?