The number-one logical fallacy committed by Christians

[Nasor]

I’ve hung around this message board for a while, and I’ve been having conversations with Christians for even longer. One rather strange thing that I’ve noticed about Christians is that a huge number of them seem to commit to logical fallacy of assuming that an idea is true simply because it would be pleasant if it were true, and conversely that an unpleasant idea must be false simply because it is unpleasant.

One of the most common things that a Christian will say when they want to convert someone is “Don’t you want eternal life?” or something alone those lines. Well, yes – I’m sure most people would be interested in acquiring eternal life. But the mere fact that I might want it doesn’t mean that Christianity is capable of giving it to me, that a god exists, or that it’s even fundamentally possible to have eternal life. You see this strange sort of “if I want it to be true, it’s true” reasoning pop up all the time.

“I believe in God because my belief give me hope.”
Why do you assume that God exists simply because his existence would give you hope? If I were going to be executed tomorrow it might give me hope to imagine that I had magic powers that would allow me to escape, but that doesn’t mean that I’m any more likely to have magic powers. If I were poor it might give me hope to imagine that I will win the lottery tomorrow, but that doesn’t make me any more likely to win.

“If God didn’t exist, there wouldn’t be any basis for an absolute system of morality.”
Here the Christian is assuming that a system of absolute morality exists simply because he wants it to exist. He hasn’t actually presented any evidence that one exists, he just assumes it to be true (since it would be pleasant) and goes on to use it as the basis of an argument for God.

“I believe in God because I want to go to heaven.”
And so on.

Here’s a recent example from our own message board, in which John J. Bannan tries to explain to someone why they shouldn’t become an atheist:

Athiests and agnostics are depressed without a sense of hope. Plod on.

Even if we accept the claim that atheists are all depressed without a sense of hope (which is absurd), I would hope that one would be rational enough to realize that this argument doesn’t make any sense – God isn’t any more likely to exist simply because his existence would make you less depressed.

I really wish that Christians would stop using this sort of reasoning, as arguments based upon it contribute nothing to discussions and only serve to make Christians look irrational.

 

[Celpha Fiael]

Well said. If you are tired of elementary theist arguments that are tooth-grindingly and embarrassingly incipient, I suggest www.ilovephilosophy.com. That message board is, on the whole, significantly smarter than this board (not without the occasional weak link), and the Religion subtopic there is the place to go to find surprisingly and refreshingly worthy arguments from intelligent theists.

I rarely post on that board, not because I don't want to, but because the habitués are so insightful, I rarely have anything to contribute that hasn't already been said in a more elegant way.

I highly recommend it.

 

[mikenostic]

I really wish that Christians would stop using this sort of reasoning, as arguments based upon it contribute nothing to discussions and only serve to make Christians look irrational.

Yeah me too, but concerning that statement where Christians are involved, you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one gets filled first; example, try to get the member here with the most irrational Christian beliefs; Sandy; to stop using her irrational sort of reasoning. Good luck with that.

 

[spidergoat]

True. Would God want believers who were only doing the appealing thing? Or were hedging their bets? I would think he could see through that. The mythology more often supports believers who believed in spite of the hardship that it brought them.