| Proof by Theoretical Stories |
|
You are here:
Meaning
>
Christian Witness
>
Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies
>
Flawed Evidence
>
Proof by Theoretical Stories
|
Logical Fallacy of Proof by Theoretical StoriesWhenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Proof by theories (stories) is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. The logical fallacy of proof by theoretical stories occurs when a story is made up to fit the observations as much as possible, but somehow the fact that the story is just a story is forgotten, and too much weight is given to the story. Sometimes, the story is even treated as if it had something to do with reality. In extreme cases, the theory/story is treated as if it were fact. Theories are used in science to try to explain what can be observed, however, they are not proof of anything. Models are also used in science, and they are helpful at times, but it must always be remembered that models and theories are not real. They may help understanding an idea, but they cannot show the idea to be any part of reality. This takes the form: I can make up stories about X. Therefore, X is true. The logical fallacy of proof by theoretical stories is one of the many ways that Agrippa's Trilemma operates. Agrippa's Trilemma will assure that every argument against God, against the Bible, and against the history of the Bible will be based on either infinite regression, circular reasoning, or arbitrary assumptions that are taken as axioms. In other words, such arguments must be logical proof by fallacy. Fallacies can be very deceiving and hard to discover, but the fallacies will be there. And it doesn't matter whether the attacks come from an angry man like Dawkins or a rocker like Gungor, the fallacies will be the bases. Agrippa's Trilemma assures this to be true. Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Theoretical Stories
Bill Nye is giving us a story as proof of evolution. Just because you can tell a story does not mean that the story actually happened.
Bill Nye is using the logical fallacy of unsupported assertion. The fireball story is just a story. It ought to be stated as a belief without proof that this was the cause of the death of the dinosaurs.
The person who doesn't want God to exist will counter by saying, "Divine revelation is made-up stuff." But how do they come to this conclusion. Their conclusion is based on circular reasoning, and it goes like this: "I presuppose that God doesn't exist. You claim that God reveals, but if God doesn't exist, He can't reveal anything. Therefore, Divine revelation is made-up stuff." That is circular reasoning. 
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question |
Other Pages in this sectionProof by Fallacy Evidence Surrogate Error in Observation Misrepresenting the Facts Distorted Evidence Unverified Evidence Hysteron Proteron Unsubstantiated Inference Assuming Facts Not In Evidence Wishful Thinking Appeal to Worldview Slippery Slope Limited Scope Mind Reading Shoehorning Confirmation Bias Sacred Cow Fantasy Projection Group Think Context Imposition Psychologist\'s Fallacy Amazing Familiarity Stolen Concept Weak Inference Anecdotal Evidence Dismissing All Personal Testimony Rewriting History Proof by Model Proof by Assumption Personal Incredulity Argument by Lack of Imagination Argument by Imagination Capturing the Naive Argument from Personal Astonishment Special Pleading Variant Imagization Self-Exclusion Unintended Self-Inclusion Ad Personam Proof by Repeated Assertion Cherishing the Zombie Argumentum Ad Lapidem Understatement Tautology Declaring Victory Assumption Correction Assumption Questionable Criteria Summary Dismissal Thought-Terminating Cliche Truism Perfectionist Fallacy Worst Case Scenario Fallacy Unwarranted Extrapolation Untestability Subjectivist Fallacy Bizarre Hypothesis Least Plausible Hypothesis Extravagant Hypothesis Privileging the Hypothesis Canceling Hypotheses Appeal to False Faith False Appeal to Heaven Inaccurate Models Hedging Politician\'s \"We\" Appeal to Nature Experimenter Bias Crucial Experiment Hearsay Ad Hoc Rescue Hindsight Bias Fallacy of the Beard Argument from Fallacy Inflation of Conflict Infinite Regress Reification Personification Slothful Induction Superstitious Thinking Meaningless Question Proving Non-Existence Argumentum ad Imaginibus Statement of Conversion Outdated Information Argument by Laziness Alien Fallacy Quantum Physics Fallacy Fallacious Abstraction Appeal to the Unknown Grasping at Straws Pragmatism Fake Hope Appeal to Intuition Appeal to Mystery Argument from Design Untestability Imaginary Evidence Monopolizing the Question Fallacy of Antecedent Faulty Predictor Pretentious Antecedent Pretentious Premise Recently Viewed |
