1. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    09 Nov '10 23:502 edits
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.

    Are there any believers on this forum who feel even slightly embarrased when your faith is championed by people using this argument?? Do you not feel your faith somewhat cheapened that it is made to stand upon a blatant logical fallacy?


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
  2. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91521
    10 Nov '10 00:44
    Originally posted by Agerg
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.

    Are there any believers on this forum who feel even slightly embarrased when your faith is championed by people using this argument?? Do you not feel your faith somewhat cheapened that it is made to stand upon a blatant logical fallacy?


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
    Actually when I hear that things must be true because so many people believe , I am immediately skeptical. Just like when some says "everyone knows".

    My own take on spirituality is not popular in real life or on the net. I follow ideas that seem silly to most around me and there have been times when for years I did not have anyone to talk about my spirituality with. I guess thats what I call my own faith-thingy.
    Its always good to know who your talking to before you start talking and then only reveal certain things when the right questions are asked.
  3. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    10 Nov '10 16:24
    Originally posted by Agerg
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.

    Are there any believers on this forum who feel even slightly embarrased when your faith is championed by people using this argument?? Do you not feel your faith somewhat cheapened that it is made to stand upon a blatant logical fallacy?


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
    I actually use a similar argument against faith:

    Since the most popular religion in the world has less that 1/3 of the world following it (or professing to, and that's not taking into consideration the various warring factions within that one faith), that implies to me that it, and every other faith, has very little likelihood of being correct. I would have thought that the one true faith would have at least 1/2 the population believing in it, with very little internal conflict

    Would any atheists feel embarrassed on hearing this argument?

    --- Penguin
  4. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    10 Nov '10 16:331 edit
    Originally posted by Agerg
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.
    I've heard it many times. But I have never heard the opposite: "I belong to a minority so I'm not sure that I am right."

    Many denominations (most of them?) belong to a minority in the society. Only catolisism are in majority in the christian world. So they must be right...?

    However, in Sweden catolisism are wrong, because here they are in minority. :/

    One creationist here at RHP said once that [an American magazine] have made a poll, that gave the result that 80% of all people believed in creationism, therefore it must be right. I answered something like "Yes, the American people. Not elsewhere." This is one way to use statistics, to show you belong to a majority and therefore must be right. "More than 95% of the population [in Bagdad] is muslims, therefore Islam is the only true religion there is [in Bagdad]".
  5. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    10 Nov '10 17:071 edit
    Originally posted by Penguin
    I actually use a similar argument [b]against faith:

    Since the most popular religion in the world has less that 1/3 of the world following it (or professing to, and that's not taking into consideration the various warring factions within that one faith), that implies to me that it, and every other faith, has very little likelihood of being correct. ...[text shortened]... al conflict

    Would any atheists feel embarrassed on hearing this argument?

    --- Penguin[/b]
    I would certainly divorse myself from that argument. What the masses of people believe have no bearing on what is true; and yes...this works both ways.
    The only time to use that argument as far as I'm concerned is in response to the same argument by theists; the reason for this being to show it is an invalid argument.
  6. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    10 Nov '10 17:10
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    I've heard it many times. But I have never heard the opposite: "I belong to a minority so I'm not sure that I am right."

    Many denominations (most of them?) belong to a minority in the society. Only catolisism are in majority in the christian world. So they must be right...?

    However, in Sweden catolisism are wrong, because here they are in minority. ...[text shortened]... [in Bagdad] is muslims, therefore Islam is the only true religion there is [in Bagdad]".
    I think I recall seeing something similar to that recently, though I forget who the poster was putting forward that poll as support for their belief!
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    10 Nov '10 18:00
    Originally posted by Penguin
    Would any atheists feel embarrassed on hearing this argument?

    --- Penguin
    I would use that argument to show that a given religion should not be assumed by default. I wouldn't use it to argue that all religions are false.
    I might also use it to argue that a religion that claims that there is a God that wants us all to believe in him is false.
  8. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    10 Nov '10 18:121 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I would use that argument to show that a given religion should not be assumed by default. I wouldn't use it to argue that all religions are false.
    I might also use it to argue that a religion that claims that there is a God that wants us all to believe in him is false.
    Just want to point out (more for Penguin's benefit) that in both the cases you would use that argument you are simply refuting some universal theist claim by showing it doesn't hold for special cases (of which there are many).

    This is a wholly different type of argument than the one penguin is using.
  9. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    10 Nov '10 18:253 edits
    Originally posted by Agerg
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.

    Are there any believers on this forum who feel even slightly embarrased when your faith is championed by people using this argument?? Do you not feel your faith somewhat cheapened that it is made to stand upon a blatant logical fallacy?


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
    ==================================
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.
    =======================================


    List three major Christian theologians or Christian philosophers of this or last century who have put forth such an argument.

    Ie. A large number of Christian believers proves that the New Testament is true.
  10. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    10 Nov '10 18:481 edit
    Originally posted by jaywill
    [b]==================================
    So many times I have heard the argument that since so many people believe in God (or Christian god) it must be true.
    =======================================


    List three major Christian theologians or Christian philosophers of this or last century who have put forth such an argument.

    Ie. A large number of Christian believers proves that the New Testament is true.[/b]
    Why??? I fail to see where referenced sophisicated philosophers
  11. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    10 Nov '10 19:021 edit
    Originally posted by Agerg
    Why??? I fail to see where referenced sophisicated philosophers
    Why not ???

    You claim it is such a popular argument. Then won't you strengthen your complaint by pointing out major Christian thinkers that use it ?

    By the way, the same interesting article you pointed to said this:

    "The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find that 90% prefer a certain brand of product over another. A cogent (strong) argument can then be made that the next person to be considered will also prefer that brand, and the poll is valid evidence of that claim. "

    That is similar to the logic I employed recently with you.

    In the thread on Soul Winning I said a greater proportion of people debating about the Deity of Jesus as opposed to the Deity of Thor presents a cogent case that the next person, (in this case you), is likely to share the concept -

    That is the concept that the argument for the actual Godness of Jesus Christ is more serious a debate then that of the actual Godness of Thor.

    Thanks for the article and its confirmation to my point.
  12. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    10 Nov '10 19:133 edits
    Originally posted by jaywill
    Why not ???

    You claim it is such a popular argument. Then won't you strengthen your complaint by pointing out major Christian thinkers that use it ?

    By the way, the same interesting article you pointed to said this:

    "The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find tha of the actual Godness of Thor.

    Thanks for the article and its confirmation to my point.
    Wrong again jaywill...your argument sought to damage my own opinion that all gods are equiprobable by appealing to what the masses think. This is just folly, plain and simple. What the majority of people think is a poor indicator of correctness.

    You are also misapplying the inductive argument as well (no surprises there!)

    Your point has not been confirmed. ;]
  13. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    10 Nov '10 19:581 edit
    Originally posted by Agerg
    Wrong again jaywill...your argument sought to damage my own opinion that all gods are equiprobable by appealing to what the masses think. This is just folly, plain and simple. What the majority of people think is a poor indicator of correctness.

    You are also misapplying the inductive argument as well (no surprises there!)

    Your point has not been confirmed. ;]
    ===============================
    Wrong again jaywill...your argument sought to damage my own opinion that all gods are equiprobable by appealing to what the masses think. This is just folly, plain and simple. What the majority of people think is a poor indicator of correctness.
    ===================================


    Underwhelmed here by your logic.

    What the greater proportion of discussers alot time to debate rather then not debate establishes cogent evidence that all considerations for the identity of God are not equally worthy of serious debate.
  14. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    10 Nov '10 20:202 edits
    Originally posted by jaywill
    [b]===============================
    Wrong again jaywill...your argument sought to damage my own opinion that all gods are equiprobable by appealing to what the masses think. This is just folly, plain and simple. What the majority of people think is a poor indicator of correctness.
    ===================================


    Underwhelmed here by your ...[text shortened]... idence that all considerations for the identity of God are not equally worthy of serious debate.[/b]
    Oh jaywill!...jaywill, jaywill, jaywill đŸ˜”
    So more people discuss Bible god than they discuss Thor. Well no s**t Sherlock! More people being Christians makes for more discussions about Christian concepts!!!...does this greater number of discussions render Bible god more plausible than Thor?

    No!

    Similarly, that more people here in the UK discuss the "X-Factor" or football than they discuss education policy doesn't make plausible the assertion who's going to win the X-Factor, or who's going to win the Premiership (or whatever is referred to as the top league in football now) is more useful to society than the education of soon-to-be adults and future decision makers.
  15. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    ZellulÀrer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    10 Nov '10 21:23
    Stochastic eschatologies?
Back to Top