Outshine The Sun: Trent Horn

Horn incorrectly frames an argument (concerning the Janzen murder/suicide case) as being a fallacious appeal to consequences, by conflating the concepts of “X is true” and “belief in X is good”; the first is a fact question, the second a value question.

For bonus points, Horn then proceeds to gratuitously bring in the issue of homosexuality. I find myself very much in favour of this move and think that Catholic apologists should engage in it whenever possible; the more that they harp on it, the more it diminishes their credibility in modern society.

Monday, 3 November 2014

Estranged Notions: Prayer, Science, and the Existence of God

Today's post:

Prayer, Science, and the Existence of God

Monday, 27 October 2014

Estranged Notions: Do Atheists Believe in God After All?

Today's post:

Do Atheists Believe in God After All?

A pretty silly study on the whole; the issues of small sample size and high variance have already been pointed out by PBR. Even Horn spots the methodological issue of not using a known-nonexistent deity or similar as a control (to which I'd add, they should also have considered using one from a culture foreign to the study participants).

A possibly more serious issue is the issue of conflation of "believe" and "have an emotional reaction to", the problem with which should be obvious.

Horn also demonstrates his ignorance of the nature of delusions (quoting the idiotic "poached egg" comparison). This is best answered with this piece from Scott Alexander.

Wednesday, 15 October 2014

Estranged Notions: On the So-Called “Choice-in-Dying”

Today's post, on a topic I don't think we've seen raised before:

On the So-Called “Choice-in-Dying”

Naturally Horn presents a one-sided view of the issue, though.

Wednesday, 30 July 2014

Estranged Notions: Answering Three Common Arguments for Abortion

Today's post continues from the last one:

Answering Three Common Arguments for Abortion

Monday, 28 July 2014

Estranged Notions: Can Atheists Defend Abortion Without Defending Infanticide?

Today's post plumbs new lows, even for SN:

Can Atheists Defend Abortion Without Defending Infanticide?

I can defend abortion without defending infanticide using only four words: “bodily autonomy” and “Schelling fence”A Schelling fence is a highly salient stopping point on what might otherwise be a slippery slope. Even leaving aside the medical evidence that there is a step change in a newborn's level of consciousness at the point where they start to breathe air, there is the completely undeniable fact that after birth is the first point at which medical decisions can be made independently for mother and child (which is an important qualitative change). Then, the fact that this question is even being asked highlights the fact that birth—even more than ‘viability’—is the most salient point in the whole process of child development.