Why Christians Should Listen to Atheist Arguments Against Suicide

This is a REPLAY of a short live broadcast I did explaining my contention that secular arguments such as the 2 main ones by Jennifer Michael Hecht are sufficient anti-suicide arguments for Christians that can prevent suicidal behavior and additional deaths and pain consequential to those behaviors.

The “practical atheism” many Christians live out is another reason, but that is for a different podcast or live broadcast. That could be a can of worms that get me booted out of both camps…and maybe I’m fine with that.

The research shows that many people who take their lives do it not from a long, planned out event, but from an impulsive and desperate act done after a big setback, humiliation or disappointment (or string of them) that leaves them feeling hopeless. Depress can be a factor, but many people who are depressed do not kill themselves.

MAKE SURE YOU LISTEN to the EPISODE this periscope is REFERRING to with Jennifer Michael Hecht. Her work is important. HERE

Hecht

 

Bounce…Bounce… “OINK” [State of the Blogosphere]

OINK! OINK!

LEOL30 via Compfight

 

“Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.”

Matthew 7:6 from Jesus‘s Sermon on the Mount.

Today, the people who haunt the blogs and freely spew their criticisms are known as trolls and I think there is a spot on parallel with that phenomenon and the point of this scriptural adage.

Here’s how the urban dictionary puts it:

troll
One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. ‘you’re nothing but a fanboy’ is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.

 

Not too many people troll around at this blog and make a mess. But once in a while. It’s not too often that I pontificate on a controversial topic. However, many do. I was at a blog recently where there were a few trolls about and the topic was a disputed sort. Antagonistic little buggers, cloaked (quite conveniently!) in anonymity were pig piling, gorging themselves on accusations and generally being unpleasant and ill-reasoned. (Note that Trolls tote suitcases! They are filled with lots of emotional contents. Baggage. The more baggage there is the more the trollish nature flares up.)

 

So, it reminded me of the deeper phenomenon, shown in the “pearls and swine” reference.

 

Rather than readers contemplating or valuing the expertise in any way, I heard the sounds, “Bounce, bounce, “oink!”

 

So why is that? And why pigs and dogs?
In the Middle East in Jesus’ time, dogs were rarely lovable pets (except maybe to a few the royal class who had time to breed and train them to be lap dogs or sporting dogs that were kept outside and used for hunting). They were not as we tame to be and treat them today. At best they guarded the property, lived on scraps and barked at strangers. Most had bad habits, went scrounging around like tenacious vultures with paws, and would ingest anything, like dead and rotting carrion. Frequently they’d get sick on the stuff and vomit. Then they would eat that too. Yuck.
They were cited in Biblical times as a cautionary tail…er…tale.
Proverbs 26:11
As a dog returns to its vomit, so fools repeat their folly.
Pigs fit in the same category. Most people assume that the ancient world couldn’t prepare a delicious and diesease-free pork entrée. Not so. In ancient Summer, pigs were eaten frequently (like me, they adored bacon perhaps). But, in Egypt swine were considered gross and vile. This sentiment seemed to filter into the Levitical laws for the Hebrews who would have been exposed to that cultural norm and largely imitated those dietary preferences. That meant Pigs=yuck. Dogs too.

 

Even now, dogs and swine both are in the habit of eating most anything and undervaluing certain precious things, jewelry from instance. They will even eat their own excrement, so I’m told. Omnivores indeed! I can vouch for the the fact on dogs, but I have little experience with pigs. Nevertheless, both have undiscriminating tastes, or they have discriminating tastes that are arbitrary and illogical. They also write the worst restaurant reviews.

 

If a hungry dog or pig, especially if it is untamed, from the wild, and thinks you have food, it will take you out and gobble it up and maybe a few of your fingers too. (I saw Bear Grylls wrestle a Razor Back once.) Best not to bring true valuables to the barnyard or wilderness.

 

This leaves us with a problem as writers or even as blog comment-writers. Do we bother writing for the public with so many pigs about? With so many unappreciative trollers who are ready to eat us alive, we often end up writing for the folks who won’t value it. I can see why writers close down their comments sections. Pigs and trolls and dogs appear to have a lot of time on their idle hands!

 

But finding the right audience is hard, even among our friendships.
A friend of mine said something like, “When I write I think about what you’ll think; and if you’ll think it’s good or not. I don’t like the idea of you not liking it.”  I told her, “Well, if I don’t like it, then it wasn’t written for me–it was written for someone else, and that’s fine.”

 

We aren’t writing for everyone. We are writing for the people who are ready and able to hear us, best.

 

If pigs or dogs eat your pearls, remember that the jewelry was never for them anyway. They trampled you down because they don’t know any better and they couldn’t comprehend the value you offered. Hold the hope that you will find those who see your pearls for what they are: valuable.

 

If you enjoyed today’s article, please share it! I invite you to sign up for more in the sidebar, or bookmark this site and visit again soon.

Thinking Class: Session 2

To read PART I click here.

I was on Facebook last night and I really think it’s the craziest scene ever and I’ve been on Facebook since 2007. (That was a time when most users were in high school or college and many scoffed at the idea that the web was changing to a social paradigm.)

People scoffed about Facebook the way you might scoff about jumping to earth from space. Of course, that happened too (see video).

Things have changed. Great grandparents muck about everyday on Facebook like it’s totally normal. Nevertheless, right now–on the social media platform used by billions–actual knowledge of facts is super low but the zest and vitriol seems sky-high.

It reminds me that most of us were not taught to think for ourselves critically. We were taught to believe what we are told. This happened in church, school, by government, law enforcement, and in social and political circles.

I want to introduce a quick look at what critical thinking actually looks like. These posters are meant to show that opinions are not the same as arguments. Arguments are not the same as opposing views or fights. A good argument in a contention based in sound thinking and a logical foundation. Yes, sound arguments are rare and tend to be demonized. But knowing what makes a sound argument helps us separate fact from opinion.

(click to enlarge)

Pass along this to others for better thinking all around! :)

thinkingclass2

(another poster is coming….visit again soon)

EXTRA CREDIT: Mill around on television, radio, or the internet until you spot a logical fallacy and then link to it on here and tell us which sort it is. (A+ for anyone who does!)

 

Thinking Class: 1st session

(POSTER BELOW)

I look around at the wars of words, the polarizing gridlock that has shutdown the Federal government (as if that could truly happen) and listen to talking heads both liberal and non liberal spew illogical nonsense. But then I realize! Most of what I hear is illogical and most arguments are irrational.

Let me explain.

Most things people say are opinions and are therefore unreasonable (in the true sense of the word: “lacking reason”). Because opinions tend to be based on emotions or other arbitrary factors they lack logic. In two to four seconds on any cable news station you’ll hear it.

This situation becomes even more apparent as you learn Critical Thinking formally.

When I learned about critical thinking and logical fallacies in depth in graduate school, I thought, why didn’t they teach us how to think in high school or at least in liberal arts university?  (I mean isn’t the whole point of education to help you to think better? Apparently  not…Silly me.)

So, yes. We literally are not taught to think well. Usefully. Thoughtfully.

That’s because it turns out that teaching people how to think independently is wildly dangerous and threatening. (Crazy, right?!)

It can upset the balance of power. That means it’s considered far better to cultivate “sheep” that follow the herd directed by the powerful instead of helping people think well using critical methods. So, we have the predicament best epitomized on cable news. Screaming and hysteria and irrational arguments aplenty! The crazies are running everything it seems.

When we stop simply believing what we are told and follow a true logical format to discover main arguments or separate opinion from facts, it can cause…wait for it…thoughtful questioning. Empires have fallen for less than that!

Critical thinking is rare and utilizing it may necessitate that answers involve reason. Serious repercussions indeed!

Why would a school (or any group exerting power) purposefully put itself in a position to be knocked off its pins by newly rational thinkers? Well, they avoid that very thing. The point is to engender obedience and conformity: Teach people in a (factory-style) system that gets them to think how we want them to and agree with us, otherwise it’s anarchy, and we can’t have that!

(See why thinking well is so rare?)

Imagine: What if you think something out of sync with your club, church, political party, or social sphere? Look out. A bumper crop of fallacies will likely be lobed at you like poop grenades! You are SUPPOSED to keep in line. Gosh, duh…you are not accepted for your ability to think outside the expectations and presuppositions of your group. So, remember, if you plan to use critical thinking be prepared to be demonized.

The worst threat of all for anyone in power is to encourage independent thinking, let alone teach it. Learning logical fallacies can lead to innovation and change and much apple cart upsetting. It’s a threat to media outlets, propagandists, governments, authorities, parents, policemen, and nearly every institution.

Below is the first poster I designed to teach (critical) thinking. Stayed tuned for more coming in the next few days.

If you’d like more people to learn how to think better, pass it along.

It could help someone.

(click to enlarge)

thinkingclass1info

Click here for an extensive list of fallacies.

To see the other posters I’ve done on fallacies, use the sidebar and search for “logical”

How to Think Better in 97 seconds

Critically thinking is something we don’t do enough. Thinking better, and making better decisions has everything to do with thinking more clearly and critically. A bad argument (aka poor logic) shouldn’t fool us, or convince us. Chances are you’re getting kicked around more than you think.

(This is supplemental material for my worldviews class.)

Listen to any radio, talk show, or news program after you understand the following logic issues, and you spot one logical fallacy after another. Now you’ll have the knowledge base to disarm flawed rationalizations and weak assertions.

So, use the next 97 seconds and pick some fallacies that appeal to you. Then, share something new you learned. Or, visit soon, and tell us the first fallacy you’ve spotted.

Absurdity · Accident · Ad nauseam · Argument from ignorance · Argument from silence · Argument to moderation · Argumentum ad populum · Base rate · Compound question ·Evidence of absence · Invincible ignorance · Loaded question · Moralistic · Naturalistic · Non sequitur · Proof by assertion · Irrelevant conclusion · Special pleading · Straw man ·Two wrongs make a right
Appeals to emotion Fear · Flattery · Nature · Novelty · Pity · Ridicule · Children’s interests · Invented Here · Island mentality · Not Invented Here · Repugnance · Spite
Genetic fallacies Ad feminam · Ad hominem (Ad hominem tu quoque) · Appeal to accomplishment · Appeal to authority · Appeal to etymology · Appeal to motive · Appeal to novelty · Appeal to poverty ·Appeals to psychology · Appeal to the stone · Appeal to tradition · Appeal to wealth · Association · Bulverism · Chronological snobbery · Ipse dixit (Ipse-dixitism) · Poisoning the well ·Pro hominem · Reductio ad Hitlerum (Blood libel)
Appeals to consequences Appeal to force · Wishful thinking
Absence paradox · Begging the question · Blind men and an elephant · Cherry picking · Complex question · False analogy · Fallacy of distribution (Composition · Division) · Furtive fallacy · Hasty generalization ·I’m entitled to my opinion · Many questions (Loaded question) · McNamara fallacy · Name calling · Red herring fallacy · Special pleading · Rationalization (making excuses) · Slothful induction
Correlative-based fallacies False dilemma (Perfect solution) · Denying the correlative · Suppressed correlative
Deductive fallacies Accident · Converse accident
Inductive fallacies Sampling bias · Conjunction fallacy · False analogy · Hasty generalization · Misleading vividness · Overwhelming exception
Vagueness and ambiguity Amphibology · Continuum fallacy · False precision · Slippery slope
Equivocation Equivocation · False attribution · Fallacy of quoting out of context · No true Scotsman · Reification
Questionable cause Animistic · Appeal to consequences · Argumentum ad baculum · Circular cause and consequence · Correlation does not imply causation (Cum hoc) · Gambler’s fallacy and itsinverse · Post hoc · Prescience · Regression · Single cause · Slippery slope · Texas sharpshooter · The Great Magnet · Unknown Root · Wrong direction
Masked man fallacy · Appeal to probability · Circular reasoning
Fallacy of propositional logic Affirming a disjunct · Affirming the consequent · Denying the antecedent · Argument from fallacy · False dilemma
Fallacy of quantificational logic Existential fallacy · Illicit Conversion · Proof by example · Quantifier shift
Syllogistic fallacy Accident · Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise · Converse accident · A dicto simpliciter · Exclusive premises · Existential · Necessity · Four-term Fallacy · Illicit major ·Illicit minor · Negative conclusion from affirmative premises · Undistributed middle