Not really sure I follow the question. An argument takes the form of a premise, a logical operator, and a conclusion. When we use the term 'logical fallacy' we are referring to a bad argument which virtually always leads to a false conclusion or presumption. Most fallacies take familiar forms, so we have names for them, and some can be quite convincing to someone who doesn't think carefully. The reason we spend so much time pointing out fallacies is because they are like a red flag telling us the conclusion is probably incorrect. You asked why it is not a logical fallacy to believe in ghosts, but it is to believe in god. Basically my answer was, both conclusions involve fallacies.
What i meant if someone was to discover what they believed to be false, would that not be a fallacy?
When it comes to accepting propositions which represent an aspect of reality, free will does not factor in for me, nor should it for anyone. This is a basic concept of the scientific method. This is the reason we have double blind testing and peer review, to factor out free will, sometimes known as bias. The truth exists independent of our will, and the truth is what we seek. If everyone on earth wanted to believe the moon was made of cheese, it wouldn't matter to the moon. We can't have confidence on our conclusions without being sure our will did not get in the way.
So then free will is free from reality?
Basically, an atheists position is, there are no logically sound arguments for god's existence, which is why we do not believe. This is also a skeptical position which can be taken on the subject of ghosts as well. Part of the reason we hang out here is because we are looking for arguments we may have not considered, and trying to explain why standard arguments are not valid.
Why are you heis and me oly? If i understood mp's words properly, he would say they are acts of randomness. How can randomness explain the unexplainable?
Anyone deserves to be taken seriously as long as they conduct themselves like an adult. This goes for anyone and you see it in atheists as well. No one is expecting you to change beliefs to satisfy others, that is a fallacy called the bandwagon argument. There are no logical arguments or valid evidence for god, which leaves faith. So the first step is admitting belief in god is based on nothing but faith, it has absolutely no support. Again, you believe simply because you are compelled to by emotion. The discussion then becomes, is it okay to believe something because we want to, on free will alone, or does it amount to wishful thinking.
I thought free will did not matter in aspects such as these?
This is why we discuss if belief in god is harmful. Many people have been harmed and are emotional, others are simply exasperated at the bad logic and irresponsible thinking involved. Most skeptics feel this way about all pseudoscientific beliefs. I don't think it's necessary to bash and ridicule to explain why believers are in error, and I usually speak up if I see it happening.
why would belief in God be harmful? IT is the individuals who take it out of proportion.
I am not sure you are guilty of anything personally, but when we speak of policies, we also speak of things like homophobia. Many people's objection to homosexuality is purely biblical. There is also the entitlement religious people often feel. They not only accept conclusions based in error, they want respect for it, and they often get it. Even drugs, like peyote, which is illegal for the rest of us to use, suddenly becomes fine if you subscribe to certain native american beliefs.
I have nothing against homosexuals or Native Americans, that stems from a lack of respect from both sides, theists and atheists. In fact i am part Tigua Indian and i do not use that as an excuse to use drugs. I think what most atheists draw their conclusions from about believers are these prime examples you have mentioned. Their failure to see that others are not like that is what makes me upset... I see atheists accuse most believers of everything that has happened in the name of religion which is to me a huge logical failure. It is like accusing every North Korean, that they hate and wish to destroy everything America stands for. does not make sense
I do not like seeing people support atheism with bad arguments anymore than I like seeing religious people do it. It's still sloppy thinking.
yes, but any argument brought up by a believer is discredited immediately no matter what they bring. You can say otherwise, but you all have made it clear, anything that comes from a believer is crap
Einstein did have rationale for his theories. When it comes to ghosts, we not only have alack of rationale for the conclusion, we have a natural explanation for the concept. People perceive meaning in patterns and assign intentional agencies to that meaning.
