Saturday, July 22, 2017

Do evolution advocates violate the establishment clause?

According to this, yes. 

And please, spare me the "A Discovery Institute person said it, so you know it has to be wrong." That's called, you know, the ad hominem circumstantial fallacy.

2 comments:

Stardusty Psyche said...

"And please, spare me the "A Discovery Institute person said it, so you know it has to be wrong." That's called, you know, the ad hominem circumstantial fallacy. "
--Argument from authority is, strictly speaking, a logical fallacy, whether applied in the positive or negative sense.

However, certain sources are highly suspect, and it is wise to approach them with great skepticism.

In this case the article very deceptively cites textbook after textbook, as though they were relevant to the public school science class debate.

They are not relevant because they are college textbooks, not high school textbooks.

At university adults take classes by choice that they pay for and can quit if they so choose. Adults at university take specialized courses with adult themes and a particular viewpoint.

Adults at university are expected to be able to use their own judgement to accept or reject what any professor or author says.

So, when the header on alternate pages says LIBERTY UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW
caveat emptor indeed.

bmiller said...

@Strawdusty,

So, when the header on alternate pages says LIBERTY UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW
caveat emptor indeed.


But it seems you can't make up your mind whether Liberty University is reliable or not. You just recently quoted someone from there:

From Feser's blog

-hammer example, is neither multaneous nor transitive.

http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1065&context=sor_fac_pubs


So it seems you are inconsistent/insincere in your application of judgement of the source or your observation of the origin of the article is vacuous.