By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
misterd on 26 April 2008
Edit Thread
Final-Fan said:
Slimebeast said:
No. See above, his first sentence. And sometimes you need propaganda to counter propaganda. Dawkins is full of shit, making ridicule of the whole "first cause"/God concept, placing it side by side with Unicorns and the Spaghetti monster.
But you're still saying it's OK to use dishonest tactics as long as the other guy is.  That means that if Dawkins can say "Hey, they started it!" then it's okay for HIM to do it; the whole thing devolves into dishonesty always being OK as long as you've been the victim of it, which everyone has on these controversial issues.  I thought it was the atheists who were all into moral relativism? 

Short version:  No, no, no.  Fight lies with truth, not lies. 

I would say "fight dishonesty with honesty", as the issue of what is truth is often the heart of the debate.

In terms of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, while I grant that it is an argument laden with sarcasm and ridicule, it is not one that is dishonest. It posits the very reasonable point that there are dozens of different belief systems, which makes "teaching all points of view" all but impossible. There was also an offer $1million dollars made to anyone who could empiracally prove that Jesus was not the son of the FSM, a sarcastic attack on Ken Hovind's similar offer made concerning evolution.

Again, while these are not the most high-minded attacks, they are not dishonest. Certainly many of us have used similar tactics in other debates on this board (mostly aimed at Leo-J).  Now to this you can either 1) attempt to out-sarcasm your opponent, or 2) logically dismantle the flaws in his analogy. I prefer to do both when possible, but if you want to win your argument, the second option is the only viable approach. This is why I hate the "Darwin Fish" people put on their cars, because it is done for no real reason other than to mock people of faith (many of whom are not creationists).

At no time is dishonesty a good idea, as you will eventually be called on it and not only made to look an ass, but undermine support for your side. Evolutionists are still trying to live down Haeckle's embryos and Piltdown man - one a seemingly honest error due to overenthusiasm, the other a complete fraud. Unfortunately, in an example of dishonesty, many creationists will point to these as evidence against science and evolution despite the fact that 1) no scientist uses them any more , 2) it was evolutionary scientists, not creationists, who debunked these claims of evidence. While I can understand many of the "ground troops" in creationist/ID movement not being aware, many of the movements leaders have been publicly corrected on these issues time and again, and yet still bring them up as evidence against evolution.