3 edits
Argumentum ad martyrdom according to Wiki:
Argumentum ad martyrdom is a pseudo-Latin term used for two different logical fallacies favoured by some Christians:
that something becomes true if the person asserting it is perceived to be hated for it (a variation on the Galileo gambit);
that martyrdom is evidence for the truth of a proposition as martyrs would not die for nothing (argument from personal certainty, a form of argument by assertion).
I never employed this logical fallacy. It would not be reliable to do so as Buddhists have set themselves on fire with gasoline and Muslims have strapped explosives to themselves.
Some atheist may daydream that such things escaped the notice of Christians somehow.
The opposite extreme may be to assume one giving up his life for something means nothing at all and need not come into consideration.
Neither extremes have I ever fallen into on this Forum.
3 edits
An answer from you would be interesting because you have been inclined to use argumentum ad martyrdom on numerous occasions.
You come short of definitely saying I used it, which I have not.
You say I have been "inclined to use".
Once you start talking what people are "inclined to use" or "tend to use" you can say anyone is "inclined" or "tends" towards just about anything you wish to associate them with.
If I used it, show me.
@sonship saidYes you have been inclined to use all manner of logical fallacies as you go about your "work" here for as long as I have been reading your stuff. You have also been inclined to resort to raw personal abuse when you get stroppy. You have ugly inclinations.
You say I have been "inclined to use".
@sonship saidYou tend to use indignant and sometimes vituperative personal remarks when you get flustered or rubbed up the wrong way.
Once you start talking what people are "inclined to use" or "tend to use" you can say anyone is "inclined" or "tends" towards just about anything you wish to associate them with.
@fmf saidNo, the OP is asking the reader to voice an opinion.
The OP is about Japanese kamikaze pilots who sacrificed themselves because they believed the Emperor of Japan was a god and it isn't about those who did not. Sorry for not being clear.
Assuming what they believed is neither here nor there. Some believed as you assume; I assume that some did not.
Either way, you seem to be using the beliefs of these people in an off hand way in order to denounce their beliefs. Perhaps you could have been more clear that that is what you intended.
@fmf saidAre you willing to guess what percentage of kamikaze[sic] pilots actually believed this?
Do you think Japanese kamikaze pilots sacrificing themselves because they believed the Emperor of Japan was a god proved anything about their Emperor? An answer from you would be interesting because you have been inclined to use argumentum ad martyrdom on numerous occasions.
No, probably not.
@fmf saidI don't think they had enough fuel to reach land or aircraft carrier /one way ticket .
Did Japanese kamikaze pilots sacrifice themselves because the Emperor of Japan actually was a god and the pilots knew for a fact that it was true, or does it only mean they believed it to be so?
1 edit
@fmf saidSo here it is.
I don't need to "prove" it to you. I am stating that you have used Argumentum ad martyrdom countless times. If people think I am telling a lie about you, so be it.
Obviously, your use of such a narrow, confining "belief" of these pilots was simply self-serving, designed to fuel yet another attack on a Christian.
I'm sorry to have answered your question in such a thoughtful, intelligent way, when that was never the intention of your question to begin with. I should have known better, considering the nature of similar "questions" you've asked in the past. Even whodey is careful to drop both shoes at once, rather than leading the readership on a wild goose chase.