27 March 2008

Quoting the Bible Doesn't Count as Thinking


From Today's Creation Moment, in reference to fiber optics and plant growth:


We are learning that just about every technological breakthrough made by man was already used by the Creator when He made the creation. There is hardly a stronger argument than this in favor of belief in an intelligent Creator!


Hardly a stronger argument? How about one not blatantly fallacious?


This is classic missing the point. Let me rewrite the premises for you:


Fiber optics technology is based on particular natural laws.

Some plants make use of similar natural laws.


The conclusion given in the Creation Moment is, "one should believe in an intelligent creator," while the premises given support something like, "Human technology and the non-human world must rely on the same laws of nature."


Note how the structure of the sentence assumes the conclusion as well. This is usually called "begging the question," in which the proposition to be proved (the existence of an intelligent creator, namely, God.) is implied in the argument itself (God created both the mechanism by which plants grow and the plants).


My logical fallacy for the day: assuming that belief in a Creator would make someone think more creatively. Curse you, equivocation!

No comments: