Recognizing Flawed Arguments
Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves (Mathew 10:16). The attacks on Christianity today are like never before. From the internet to Hollywood movies to college campuses, secularists have launched a full scale organized assault on Biblical doctrine. Quite often they are just misrepresenting what the Bible teaches, in which case understanding our Bible can provide an adequate response. But many times secularists are using faulty logic to attack Christians and make their case. The goal of this section is to help the believer identify faulty arguments, so they can expose them for what they are. Below are several examples that we cover in our course Introduction to Apologetics.
Red Herring
This occurs when a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument which the speaker believes will be easier to speak to. Example: Shouldn’t women have the right to do what they want with their bodies? Of course women should have that right, but this distracts from the real issue of when life begins. You may be making your case for the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and the skeptic will say, "Christians are just a bunch of hypocrites." Watch for this kind of thing and don't let your speaker switch the subject on you. It happens quite often.
Cherry Picking
The act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. Example: I heard of a pastor who committed adultery, therefore all Christians are hypocrites. Aren't Christians responsible for the Crusades and Inquisitions? These are exceptions rather than the rule. Most Christians do not go on Crusades or commit adultery, rather we have a rich heritage in human rights, feeding the poor, and so on. Evolutionists are notorious for this. For example, they will use the Buckeye butterfly, which looks like a leaf to make their case that it's markings and colors evolved to protect it from predators. But of course that only makes you wonder how the rest of the butterfly species at the bottom of the food chain survived because many have colors as bright as the sun. The Venus Flytrap apparently evolved into a bug eater to protect itself from extinction, which leaves one wondering why we have fruit trees which attract bugs. Apparently the markings on the leopard evolved to help it blend in to the environment, which begs the question why are there still zebras which can be spotted from miles away.
Straw Man Argument
This is based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position so it can be easily discredited. Example: Why would God send us to hell for the sins of Adam. This is a misrepresentation. God sends no one to Hell, we choose hell and no one goes for Adam's sins, rather they go for their own sins. Another example: I recently heard a liberal politician say; I’m not like those conservatives who think that everything the government does is bad. Of course no one thinks that everything the government does is bad, but this is easy to discredit.
Internal Inconsistency
A statement that cannot meet its own standard of truth. Example: I don’t like judgmental people. This of course is a statement of judgment.
Moving the Goal Post
An argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed, and some other evidence is demanded. Some call it lowering the bar to make a claim more appealing. Example: Marijuana is not as bad as alcohol, therefore it should be legal too. I’d rather have kids adopted by gay parents than have them living with abusive families. Of course, alcohol and abuse have never been the standard for the common good, but by lowering the bar that argument makes sense.
Nirvana Fallacy
This is when solutions to problems are dismissed because they are not perfect. Example: The world is not perfect therefore it could not have been designed by a creator. Design does not imply perfection. A car is obviously designed, but sometimes it breaks. Another example: Capitalism leaves too many people in poverty. Of course it does leave many in poverty, but to date, capitalism is the best economic system we know of to raise people out of poverty.
Negative Proof Fallacy
This is the position that because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false. Example: There is no proof that hell exists. This is correct but that doesn't mean it does not exist. We can turn this on the atheist, there is no proof that the universe created itself. So while we may believe something that has no proof, so do they.
Proof by Example
This is where examples are offered as inductive proof for a universal proposition. Example: Finches on the Galapagos Islands had beaks that changed, therefore evolution is true. While the beaks may have changed, this is not evolution, as that would require the emergence of new species. Another example: My local pastor committed adultery, therefore all pastors are bad people. This is a flaw often used by the new atheists.
Correlation does not Imply Causation
This is a phrase used by scientists and statisticians to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not imply that one causes the other. Example: The seat belt light always goes on before we experience turbulence, therefore the seat belt light causes turbulence. Denmark, which is secular, has one of the lowest crime rates while America, which is religious, has one of the highest in the western world, therefore religion causes crime. But of course many things contribute to crime rates. First of all, Denmark is half the size of South Carolina and has only 5.6 million people, making it much easier to police. Second, no European country is truly secular, as all have been influence by 1,500 years of Christian social philosophy. For a truly secular country, you must look to China or North Korea. We can go on, but the point is that when someone is using correlations to make their case, look a little closer and remind them that correlation does not imply causation.
One or the Other
This happens when only one of two choices are offered, where there may be more than one. Example: Do you believe in science or the Bible? This of course is a trap as we can believe in both science and the Bible. When a skepitc gives you choices you do not have to pick according to their options and in some cases like the euthyphro dilemma you can reject both.
Red Herring
This occurs when a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument which the speaker believes will be easier to speak to. Example: Shouldn’t women have the right to do what they want with their bodies? Of course women should have that right, but this distracts from the real issue of when life begins. You may be making your case for the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and the skeptic will say, "Christians are just a bunch of hypocrites." Watch for this kind of thing and don't let your speaker switch the subject on you. It happens quite often.
Cherry Picking
The act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. Example: I heard of a pastor who committed adultery, therefore all Christians are hypocrites. Aren't Christians responsible for the Crusades and Inquisitions? These are exceptions rather than the rule. Most Christians do not go on Crusades or commit adultery, rather we have a rich heritage in human rights, feeding the poor, and so on. Evolutionists are notorious for this. For example, they will use the Buckeye butterfly, which looks like a leaf to make their case that it's markings and colors evolved to protect it from predators. But of course that only makes you wonder how the rest of the butterfly species at the bottom of the food chain survived because many have colors as bright as the sun. The Venus Flytrap apparently evolved into a bug eater to protect itself from extinction, which leaves one wondering why we have fruit trees which attract bugs. Apparently the markings on the leopard evolved to help it blend in to the environment, which begs the question why are there still zebras which can be spotted from miles away.
Straw Man Argument
This is based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position so it can be easily discredited. Example: Why would God send us to hell for the sins of Adam. This is a misrepresentation. God sends no one to Hell, we choose hell and no one goes for Adam's sins, rather they go for their own sins. Another example: I recently heard a liberal politician say; I’m not like those conservatives who think that everything the government does is bad. Of course no one thinks that everything the government does is bad, but this is easy to discredit.
Internal Inconsistency
A statement that cannot meet its own standard of truth. Example: I don’t like judgmental people. This of course is a statement of judgment.
Moving the Goal Post
An argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed, and some other evidence is demanded. Some call it lowering the bar to make a claim more appealing. Example: Marijuana is not as bad as alcohol, therefore it should be legal too. I’d rather have kids adopted by gay parents than have them living with abusive families. Of course, alcohol and abuse have never been the standard for the common good, but by lowering the bar that argument makes sense.
Nirvana Fallacy
This is when solutions to problems are dismissed because they are not perfect. Example: The world is not perfect therefore it could not have been designed by a creator. Design does not imply perfection. A car is obviously designed, but sometimes it breaks. Another example: Capitalism leaves too many people in poverty. Of course it does leave many in poverty, but to date, capitalism is the best economic system we know of to raise people out of poverty.
Negative Proof Fallacy
This is the position that because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false. Example: There is no proof that hell exists. This is correct but that doesn't mean it does not exist. We can turn this on the atheist, there is no proof that the universe created itself. So while we may believe something that has no proof, so do they.
Proof by Example
This is where examples are offered as inductive proof for a universal proposition. Example: Finches on the Galapagos Islands had beaks that changed, therefore evolution is true. While the beaks may have changed, this is not evolution, as that would require the emergence of new species. Another example: My local pastor committed adultery, therefore all pastors are bad people. This is a flaw often used by the new atheists.
Correlation does not Imply Causation
This is a phrase used by scientists and statisticians to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not imply that one causes the other. Example: The seat belt light always goes on before we experience turbulence, therefore the seat belt light causes turbulence. Denmark, which is secular, has one of the lowest crime rates while America, which is religious, has one of the highest in the western world, therefore religion causes crime. But of course many things contribute to crime rates. First of all, Denmark is half the size of South Carolina and has only 5.6 million people, making it much easier to police. Second, no European country is truly secular, as all have been influence by 1,500 years of Christian social philosophy. For a truly secular country, you must look to China or North Korea. We can go on, but the point is that when someone is using correlations to make their case, look a little closer and remind them that correlation does not imply causation.
One or the Other
This happens when only one of two choices are offered, where there may be more than one. Example: Do you believe in science or the Bible? This of course is a trap as we can believe in both science and the Bible. When a skepitc gives you choices you do not have to pick according to their options and in some cases like the euthyphro dilemma you can reject both.