Post by Radrook Admin on Sept 7, 2022 8:23:02 GMT -5
Invincible Ignorance:
I recently saw someone challenge a deist to present him with compelling evidence concerning the existence of a creator. On the surface such a requests might appear to be sincere. However, my personal experience has been tat they are merely requests to be presented with evidence in order to dismiss the evidence aw invalid. You see, unfortunately, some people are veritably inconvincible, and always unceremoniously tag everything, no matter how compelling, as non-evidence. This is referred to as invincible ignorance:
The invincible ignorance fallacy, also known as argument by pigheadedness, is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word.
The method used in this fallacy is either to make assertions with no consideration of objections or to simply dismiss objections by calling them excuses, conjecture, etc. or saying that they are proof of nothing, all without actually demonstrating how the objection fit these terms. It is similar to the ad lapidem fallacy, in which the person rejects all the evidence and logic presented, without providing any evidence or logic that could lead to a different conclusion.
The method used in this fallacy is either to make assertions with no consideration of objections or to simply dismiss objections by calling them excuses, conjecture, etc. or saying that they are proof of nothing, all without actually demonstrating how the objection fit these terms. It is similar to the ad lapidem fallacy, in which the person rejects all the evidence and logic presented, without providing any evidence or logic that could lead to a different conclusion.
In short, their rejection of evidence has absolutely nothing to do with its relevance or validity in reference to the issue. It is merely a planned stubborn, reflex-reaction to anything that might be presented in support of intelligent design regardless of its nature. I refer to it as the Mr. Magoo Syndrome. Remember that cartoon character called Mr. Magoo?
He was this seemingly, almost blind old man who went about seeing only what he wanted to see, because he purposefully squinted his eyes almost shut. Everything else, he simply ignored as non-existent.
It's called selective blindness, and is the regular mindless manner in which atheists treat any evidence that might contradict their unproven and unobserved, pet abiogenesis idea.
He was this seemingly, almost blind old man who went about seeing only what he wanted to see, because he purposefully squinted his eyes almost shut. Everything else, he simply ignored as non-existent.
It's called selective blindness, and is the regular mindless manner in which atheists treat any evidence that might contradict their unproven and unobserved, pet abiogenesis idea.