Bulverism is required in "the online code of conduct" when one signs up for twitter.

@peterplotts1238

Жыл бұрын

This channel's code of conduct is agreeable to me. I suppose there must be atheists who are not aggressive, but I haven't met any yet.

@Tom_Tom_Klondike

Жыл бұрын

@@peterplotts1238 I'm an atheist and I'm sitting here trying to figure out if wanting to post "I'm not aggressive!" Will make me seem aggressive. XD

@peterplotts1238

Жыл бұрын

@@Tom_Tom_Klondike. At the risk of giving you a straight answer, no. But isn't your question beside the point? We're your feelings hurt by the cautionary statement? If you like, we can talk about that. Lewis was an atheist, by the way.

@mavisemberson8737

3 ай бұрын

He had been an atheist in his youth but became Christian . He wrote about it specifically . @@peterplotts1238

This is a great one. Demonstrates that arguing against the man is fool hardy. It's why we are told in the scripture that we don't fight against flesh and blood.

I love this last part about the attempt to substitute causes for reasons

Breathtakingly Prophetic. My goodness.

@marmeemarch7080

2 жыл бұрын

or, maybe, an example of "the more things change, the more they stay the same."

Ironically an atheist committed Bulverism by saying that C S Lewis was a cross dresser as a counter to a quote by C S Lewis that I had posted.

@peterplotts1238

Жыл бұрын

Yes, that sounds about right for one of those followers of "science". Aren't they just adorable? According to the wisdom of our age that should have made Lewis a hero.

The safest bet is to presume that all thoughts are tainted. And develop a set of coping skills for it.

@anthonypolonkay2681

2 жыл бұрын

If the tainting is not so much that it destroys reason, then there is no coping necessary, if it is so much that it destroys reason, nothing can cope to provide you with reason. Because your very ideas to cope will themselves be tainted thoughts.

@chriszablocki2460

2 жыл бұрын

@Eric Allen from forming an irrational or naive worldview.

Does anyone know where I can find the Doodle version. If this? It got taken down o Youtubd

As a Latter-day Saint (mormon) this was actually pretty reassuring to hear. C.S. Lewis's idea of Bulverism is a very cogent observation. Despite all the evidence, I sometimes worry that I suffer confirmation bias. But the facts speak for themselves.

@michaelhicks4196

Жыл бұрын

The evidence for what?

@KnuttyEntertainment

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelhicks4196 My religion, the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Particularly when concerning the Book of Mormon. You can learn about it here if you'd like: kzread.info/dash/bejne/hIGKm5KMdcu2mrw.html I find this playlist to be one of the best compilations of evidence for the faith, well structured and presented like a court case.

@henrymccue2922

Жыл бұрын

everyone suffers confirmation bias

@KnuttyEntertainment

Жыл бұрын

@@henrymccue2922 Very true

@robertjarman4261

Жыл бұрын

Knutty just sit down, relax and have a cup of coffee.

I once got told that I argue like a white man. I didn't have a name for the fallacy at the time.

@kylemacdougall8355

Жыл бұрын

That's another way of saying, "You make too much sense! Stop it!" 😆

@peterplotts1238

Жыл бұрын

How does a white man argue? You should have asked your friend. It has nothing to do with race by the way. Do you know who Thomas Sowell is? That's a straight question. Hint: he doesn't argue theology, and publicly, as far as I know, doesn't discuss religion.

@morefiction3264

Жыл бұрын

@@peterplotts1238 At the time I did not know who Thomas Sowell is. It was in a class and she wasn't a friend, I figured she meant with logic although I would never say someone couldn't argue logically because of their ethnic background. I took her statement as concession that she had lost the argument.

@peterplotts1238

Жыл бұрын

@@morefiction3264 I never forget that my own "white" European forbearers not so long ago were tribal pagans and among the last to achieve civilization, which they did not invent on their own.

@peterplotts1238

Жыл бұрын

Of all the things you can know about a person, their race is perhaps the least useful fact when it comes to understanding who they are. Would you ever pretend that you had someone figured out because their eyes were brown or blue? Sounds absurd doesn't it? Because it is absurd.

3:37

I'm having a hard time after listening to this in it's entirety distinguishing Bulverism from the genetic fallacy. Can someone help me out?

@CSLewisessays

Жыл бұрын

Bulverism _is_ the genetic fallacy

@stever786

Жыл бұрын

@@CSLewisessays Well that makes a lot more sense! Thanks!

@Binary10100

11 ай бұрын

It’s not exactly the same. The ‘genetic fallacy’ just means dismissing an argument based on its source. Bulverism rather dismisses an argument by attempting to provide the reasons for why it is believed by the opponent. Both are pretty similar. But there’s a distinction

@CapnCoconuts

6 ай бұрын

It's a double fallacy where genetic fallacy meets circular reasoning.

Where did the DOODLE GO????

@CSLewisessays

Жыл бұрын

Copyright shenanigans. He retracted the vids in fear of possible strikes. I just don't care so mine's up.

Zizek puts this reasoning in reverse, saying lets look at the underlying motivations even if the claims are true, the mad man may think there is a conspiracy against him but if by coincidence he turns out to be right he is still none the less mad.

Philosophy. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.

What is bulverism?

@cameronbaines9691

2 жыл бұрын

I think C.S Lewis is saying here that bulverism is "dismissing an argument or idea based on the identity of the person forwarding it rather than on if it is logical or evidenced". Edit: "like" changed to "think"

@christopherskipp1525

2 жыл бұрын

@@cameronbaines9691 Well yes, such would always apply. I was just wondering the what the origin of the term was. Maybe Lewis just invented it, however, it sounds specific.

@SamB4Sanity

2 жыл бұрын

@@cameronbaines9691 That's fairly close. Lewis coined the term to refer to the tactic in an argument that revolves around assuming your opponent is wrong from the outset and merely providing reasons as to why they assume the position they do. It's the tendency to circumvent refutation in discussions in order to "win". It was apparently prevalent in modern thought and it seems to have permeated our own thinking in the postmodern age.

@dezlondes7106

2 жыл бұрын

4:00 Listen to the example about the bank balance

@enochliu8316

2 жыл бұрын

@@christopherskipp1525 5:43.

Just logically destroyed BLM and Antifa slogans in one fell swoop.

@ummdustry5718

2 жыл бұрын

Could you give an example of one such slogan you find paticularly bulverist?

@thebacons5943

2 жыл бұрын

Strange you take Lewis for a reactionary