Time bomb tactics, and the unbrakable neo-atheist

[Observer of dreams]

Hello, I am raising awareness about these tactics so that no neo-atheist will be safe on these boards from here on out. My subject today is Questioner. The quotes that follow are from the paradox topic.

By tactics I mean the following.

Questioner said

Using the same reasoning, any argument in favor of God would be dropped like this paradox. It seems very common among theists to speak like agnostics when they feel threatened, they just don't realize their arguments against the ability to gain knowledge about God defeat their side as well as the atheist's side. The bold parts are 100% agnosticism and 0% theism.

A discussion of agnosticism and why it is unsatisfying is outside the scope of this thread. But I can assure you, as a theist you don't want to go there.

Tactics used here are:

Accuses others of misunderstanding. A completely reasonable argument was made regarding his paradox, instead of refuting the argument he simply resorted to this tactic so he would avoid losing face.

Introduces irrelevant issues Instead of refuting the argument he introduced claims that I was making an agnostic argument because I felt threatened. This way he doesn't have to explain himself further.

Chooses only what is self gratifying He is an atheist, a scientist, and a firm believer in this paradox, his biased created a one way mirror so that he couldn't look past his own reasoning, this is caused by a superior self image.

Builds self up by putting other down He used this tactic by taking my fondness of theism and turning it against me as if it is inferior to his way of thinking, this is another example of a superior self-image.

Once again your answer is quite incoherent. I also can't help seeing a "growing ignorance" about grammar. Maybe it's better to stop here?

Here is another example of accusing others of misunderstanding, also he used another tactic in bold, points out others faults. He used my bad grammar as ammunition. Doing this puts himself on a higher pedestal than me in his mind, it creates a kind of security blanket. It almost ring with "Well you think I'm bad? what about so and so he's really bad" it is also an exercise in shifting the blame and the focus.

While the paradox itself is unbreakable, I think I have found out why this kind of argument should be refused. I will post my thoughts about this tomorrow to give this thread some closure.

Another example of choosing only what is self gratifying. The paradox was broken, and the discussion henceforth was pointless unless my argument that the paradox is unscientific could be refuted. I am not saying my argument is irrefutable. All I am saying is that he did not refute it once, but rather resorted to these tactics once backed into a corner.

All and all he used 8 tactics. Why are they tactics? They are called tactics because they are a tactical way to be dishonest and still fly under the radar. I'm speaking about these to raise awareness and give tools to those who need them. Not all atheists do this, that is why I labeled them neo-atheist. I acknowledge also that it is not just atheist who use tactics, but anyone who is choosing ignorance over wisdom.

Edited December 8, 2006 by Observer of dreams

[Guest K.R.E.B.S]

Thank you for pointing these out.

Blessings,

Joe

[Joshua-777]

Thanks for the pointers, I've encountered all of these tatics at one point or another.

[Joshua-777]

Wow new aithiests movement, thats pretty sad, and pointless. Oh well, Praise the Lord cause he has victory over all things!

[Joshua-777]

1st corinthians 1:18-31

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:

[Observer of dreams]

Runners high

Observer of dreams, your post is a little unfair I think. Both sides of the God argument can and do use rhetorical tactics. It's not just an "neo-atheist" thing.

End sentence of original topic

I acknowledge also that it is not just the atheist who use tactics, but anyone who is choosing ignorance over wisdom.

Ask an atheist

Also, a better way to describe a "neo-atheist" would be an "aggressive strong atheist".

Point very well taken and will be applied henceforth

[Guest K.R.E.B.S]

The article was in Wired magazine: http://www.wired.com/news/wiredmag/0,71985-0.html

I read this article a while ago too and sounds pretty ironic that atheists want to form a "religion" to defeat religion, don't you think?

But, I do agree with Dawkins on one thing; Love your neighbor as yourself was, is, and never will be good for society...

Respectfully,

Joe

[Observer of dreams]

Honestly neither believer, nor atheist understand God. What it comes down to is our choice to pursue that which we don't understand, or refuse that which we don't understand. Some of you atheists will turn believer, and that is because you will choose not to believe in God, but later evolve a deeper understanding of who/what God is. not complete understanding, but some advancement.

[Observer of dreams]

The tactics are split up into major-tactics and sub-tactics. Sub-tactics can be separated into the three major tactics, the major tactics however are catagories within themselves.

1. Shifts the Blame and the Focus

a. Attempts to confuse

b.Points out others faults

c.Builds self up by putting others down

d.Makes a big scene over minor issues

e.Accuses others of misunderstanding

f.Uses anger as a weapon to control others

g.Argues over "words" to avoid real issue

h.Introduces irrelevant issues (race/gender)

i.Puts others on defense by embarrassing

2. Lies and Deceives

a.Deliberately vague

b.Avoids obligations (by saying "I forgot")

c.Tells what others want to hear, not the whole truth

d.Omits facts; reveals only what pleases self

e.Says "yes", or agrees without meaning it

3. Ignores Obligations

a.Does not pay attention

b.Chooses only what is self-gratifying

c.Refuses to communicate or participate--silence

d.Minimizes behavior ("I just got into a little trouble")

e.Says "I'm changed" after doing one right thing

This is every tactic that can be used. if anyone is interested and wants me to continue please do so, if not I'll discontinue. I'm not here to force things down peoples throats, only to help. If a human being, regardless of being atheist or believer has a question please post it. This is in apologetics since, as is the nature of this forum, conversations on most issues tend to curve towards a defense of ones own beliefs. This topic will end up there at some point I am sure so I saved the trouble of posting it somewhere else and just posted it right in the middle of the dogfight.

[billie]

Wow, my husband's got 1 and 2 down to a fine art,