27-Mar-2003.

Okay. I'm sick of it.

If I've sent you here from one of the IRC channels I moderate, or from a moderated programming newsgroup, then read the entire thing and (1) write to me as to what you did wrong, (2) Tell me your sorry, and (3) ask politely to be un-blocked or un-banned. I'll think about it.

I'm fine with people using religion as a reason for their own action. I'm deeply religious myself, and hold my views very dear. But they are my own views, and I don't force them on others.

Religion in personal life is wonderful. Religion in argument must be carefully articulated if you decide to use it, otherwise you will be opening yourself up to fallacious arguments. If you are on a group I moderate, and you want to use religion, follow these rules or I will ban you. If you aren't on one of my groups, I'd ask that you consider these things generally.

Bad Thing 1: Appeal To Authority. Either you are an authority on the topic, or your view is equal to everyone else. Unless you are a diety, you are not an authority on the views of diety. For those who need an biblical reference for everything, see Isaiah 55:8-9. (for your thoughts are not my thoughts, neither are your ways my ways saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.) Because you are not an authority, your opinion is just that, your opinion, and something that everyone is entitled to.

A corollary to this is that because your views are of equal value, it doesn't matter if one person is Christian, another Muslim, another Jewish, another Hindu, and yet another worships tree-frogs. As far as I'm concerned, they are that person's beliefs. If you assert that either you or your holy writ are the final authority, you are displaying both ignorance and insolent behavior. That will get you banned by myself or just about any other moderator out there.

Bad Thing 2: Division of properties and Hasty Generalization. Just because a whole has a property does not mean that the components have the property, or conversly, just because a component as a property, the whole doesn't necessarily have that property. The best example I have of that is when people cite single lines of scripture (specifically from the 4 gospels) and state that that is the view of Diety. An example is that in many instances Jesus is recorded as requiring peace (turn the other cheek, seventy times seven, etc.) but also advocating violence (cleansing the temple using violence, referred to as Lord of Hosts, his vengence, etc.) Which is it? I like John 7:24 (Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgement.) Of course, there are those who would say not to judge at all, but that's again falling under the same fallacy... To do anything, you must decide to do it, and you do that by making some sort of judgement. But that's another story.

Bad Thing 3: Burden of proof. I've heard too many times "The bible said this in chapter and verse, so prove that YOU are right." As far as I'm concerned, there is no way to prove one's belief. That kind of statement implies that you are an authoity, that a property of a part is indicative of the whole, and that your translation of a document recorded thousands of years ago and transcribed by hand is completely accurate. Until you have proven your assertion, demanding a counter-proof is uncalled for.

Bad Thing 4: Personal Attack. If you decide to get into a debate or discussion about religion, attacking the person (Ad Hominem Abusive) will get you banned fast.

Bad Thing 5: Disrespect of other people's views. This isn't a logic error but a social issue. Because you are in social situations, you must accept that your actions will have an impact others. Consider this: If you were in a position of authority (a manager or employer) and you made the same comments that you make online, would you be opening yourself up for a discrimination law suit? Would you be considered abusive? Could you be fired or even jailed for your actions? If yes, you are probably not respecting other people's views. You don't have to agree, you just have to understand that everyone is entitled to their views.

Got that? Good. That's it for this rant.