| Special Pleading |
|
You are here:
Meaning
>
Christian Witness
>
Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies
>
Flawed Evidence
>
Special Pleading
|
Logical Fallacy of Special PleadingThe logical fallacy of special pleading 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. Whenever 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. The logical fallacy of special pleading occurs when standards, principles, and/or rules are not applied universally. Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Special Pleading
So, the positions of fossils in the rocks show the age of the fossils and when they first appeared in time if it fits in with the big-bang-billions-of-years-molecules-to-man story, but if they don't fit the story, then their positions in the rocks mean nothing. That is selective evidence and special pleading.
If one side must be directly observable, repeatable, or testable, then the other side must also be. Both sides of this argument use science to analyze what can be observed in the present, and that science is directly observable, repeatable, or testable. However, from that point, evolution rests on stories that rest on a worldview. And from that point, creation rests on revelation from God.
Since this was brought as an accusation by an evolutionist who is not willing to give up Naturalism/Materialism/Evolutionism as an interpretive framework for science, this is an example of the fallacy of special pleading.
Evolution is not scientifically testable either. In fact, science doesn’t test the past very well at all. So, this is a case of special pleading where the evolutionists want to use one set of rules to evaluate their own claims and another set of rules to evaluate anyone else’s claims. (Although, Jesus Christ is testable since everyone who seeks Him finds Him. And we know that God created the Heavens and the Earth in six days by revelation, because God reveals this fact to us through the Bible.
And it is special pleading hiding behind fallacy abuse of the according to the rules fallacy. This example is actually adapted from a book, Science, Evolution, and Creationism, which is critiqued by https://evolutiondismantled.com/special-pleading.
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 Proof by Theoretical Stories 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 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 |
