JWeinCom said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
The burden of proof is yours. If you claim that somebody has made a fallacy, then you need to demonstrate that they have. Explain how his arguments are "God of the gaps fallacies", or leave the thread. Hell, I don't even think that God of the Gaps is an official fallacy at all. It's just a buzzword thrown around by certain people. Here check for yourself, it isn't listed. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html
The sad thing here is that I'm on your side, but I have to call a spade a spade. You are throwing around claims of fallacies left and right without supporting them at all.
|
I don't believe there is any official list of fallacies. What you're probably referring to is the non-exhaustive categories of logical fallacies that we tend to address. But, beyond those broad fallacies, there can be specific variations in regards to certain subjects.
The god of the gap fallacy (usually referred to as god of the gaps argument, but lets not split hairs) is a variation of the argument from ignorance fallacy. For example, we can't (although I'd say we can) determine where morality comes from exactly, so it must be god. And he pointed out exactly where the fallacy was used several times. When you say "100 years ago using radio waves for communication would've made you a witch.. you really think that in 100 years we won't uncover more hidden aspects of reality" that is basically a textbook example of argument from ignorance.
|
That's not what argument from ignorance is. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html
There is no evidence for God, therefore God doesn't exist is an argument from ignorance.
There is no evidence against God, therefore God exists is another argument from ignorance.
The argument from ignorance takes the form of "There is no evidence for A therefore not A", and "There is no evidence against B therefore B".
