This argument was far different from the others, and what made it different was that I had to argue with my housemates. I usually avoid that, and the reason is simple: If they turn out to be too unreasonable, I would lose my respect for them. It is something to lose intellectual respect for someone you don’t know, but to lose it for a housemate is going to be problematic, especially since I’m not good at hiding my feelings.
Three of them tried to gang up on me, A girl and her husband (the husband was silent the whole time), and another guy, and for an hour and a half I tried to explain the basics of logic, science and thinking to them. I will not write the whole thing here, because it is somehow even below elementary logic.
The fallacies that the girl made: Appealing to emotions: “God exists because deep down everyone can feel him.” And also begging the question: “God exists because this world has rules, and those rules are there because God has put them there.”
And to think she is studying for a PhD… How much intellectual respect should I lose for her?
The other guy was a disaster: You don’t expect someone to give a good argument, when that person does not know the difference between logic, science and technology! Actually, the things that he said were so bizarre that made me say “Oh my God!”.
His fallacies? Well, I don’t remember all of them, but he made the textbook case fallacy of appealing to ignorance numerous times “There are many things in the world that we don’t know, and that shows there is a God.”
Each time, I tried to tell them about the fallacies they made. And each time the girl said: “But God loves you!” and the other guy called me “Narrow minded.” How much intellectual respect do you think is left there?
But since I was mostly arguing with myself, I had to answer some questions. The other guy asked me: “Why do you think God should be rationalized?” and that was he had asked me some questions about the world and “Is there anything that cannot be rationalized?” which my answer to it was “Yes, like music.”
He refuted himself at the exact next sentence “The nature creates this feeling…”. Well, then that’s nature, not God, right?
But, that question about rationalizing God made me think about something else. See, it is true that music, love, art, literature etc… are idealistic feelings. But doesn’t that make the whole idea of God idealistic too? Let’s take love for example here: Love is an idealistic feeling, but yet everyone talks about it, and everyone knows what it is. Why isn’t God in the same category?
It seems fairly simple: Because God is supposed to be a “being” not a “feeling”. And of course we know that all major religions say that “he” exists in reality, not just in dreams with a Nimbus around his head.
But, what would our answer be to someone, who actually reduces his or her God to just a feeling?
My answer would be “Good luck my friend, I have nothing else to say!” But, not before I give them a piece of my mind: “If you were born deaf, you’d never have stood a chance in understanding the feeling of listening to music. The same goes for being blind and Mona Lisa: You will never know that feeling of mystery, or any other kind of feeling that looking at that painting creates. But if you insist on love, then castrate yourself and let’s see if you can feel love again!”