I gather that Tim Tebow is extremely good at football. That's just as well, for he certainly isn't very good at thinking. Perhaps the fact that he was home schooled by missionary parents is to blame.
The following is what passes for logic in the Tebow mind. His mother was advised by doctors to abort him, but she refused, which is why Tim is here. So abortion is a bad thing. Masterful conclusion.
It is a version of what, following the great Nobel-Prizewinning biologist Peter Medawar, I have called the Great Beethoven Fallacy.
Versions of the Great Beethoven Fallacy are attributed to various Christian apologists, and the details vary. The following is the version favoured by Norman St John Stevas, a British Conservative Member of Parliament. One doctor to another:
"About the terminating of pregnancy, I want your opinion. The father was syphilitic. The mother tuberculous. Of the four children born, the first was blind, the second died, the third was deaf and dumb, the fourth was also tuberculous. What would you have done?"
"I would have terminated the pregnancy."
"Then you would have murdered Beethoven."
It is amazing how many people are bamboozled by this spectacularly stupid argument. Setting aside the simple falsehood that Ludwig van Beethoven was the fifth child in his family (he was actually the eldest), the falsehood that any of his siblings was born blind, deaf or dumb, and the falsehood that his father was syphilitic, we are left with the 'logic'. As Peter Medawar, writing with his wife, Jean Medawar, said,
"The reasoning behind this odious little argument is breathtakingly fallacious . . . the world is no more likely to be deprived of a Beethoven by abortion than by chaste absence from intercourse."
If you follow the 'pro-life' logic to its conclusion, a fertile woman is guilty of something equivalent to murder every time she refuses an offer of copulation. Incidentally, 'pro life' always means pro human life, never animal life although an adult cow or monkey is obviously far more capable of feeling pain and fear than a human fetus. But the profoundly un-evolutionary nature of this terminology is another story and I'll set it on one side.
The sperm that conceived Tim Tebow was part of an ejaculate of (at an average estimate) 40 million. If any one of them had won the race to Mrs Tebow's ovum instead of the one that did, Tim would not have been born, somebody else would. Probably not such a good quarterback but - we can but hope - a better logician, who might have survived the home schooling and broken free. That is not the point. The point is that every single one of us is lucky to be alive against hyper-astronomical odds. Tim Tebow owes his existence not just to his mother's refusal to have an abortion. He owes his existence to the fact that his parents had intercourse precisely when they did, not a minute sooner or later. Then before that they had to meet and decide to marry. The same is true of all four of his grandparents, all eight of his great grandparents, and so on back.
Religious apologists are unimpressed by this kind of argument because, they say, there is a distinction between snuffing out a life that is already in existence (as in abortion) and failure to bring life into existence in the first place. It's not a distinction that survives analytical thought, however. Look at it from the point of view of Tim's unborn sister (let us say), who would have been conceived two months later if only Tim had been aborted. Admittedly, she is not in a position to complain of her non-existence. But then nor would Tim have been in a position to complain of his non-existence, if he had been aborted. You need a functioning nervous system in order to complain, or regret, or feel wistful, or feel pain, or miss the life that you could have had. Unconceived babies don't have a nervous system. Nor do aborted fetuses. As far as anything that matters is concerned, an aborted fetus has exactly the same mental and moral status as any of the countless trillions of unconceived babies. At least, that is true of early abortions, which means the vast majority.
The fact that the Tim Tebow advertisement is a load of unthought-through nonsense is no reason to ban it. That would infringe our valued principle of free speech. The best that the rest of us can do is point out, to anyone that will listen despite our lack of money to pay for such advertisements, that it is nonsense. As I have just done. (The above article comes from the "On Faith" section of the Washington Post)
I am having a fantasy of watching Richard Dawkins debating Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney on the abortion issue. How long do you think they would last when dealing with somebody who has such a clear command of logic and, to use a favorite phrase of Palin's, common sense?
I just love Dawkins.
ReplyDeleteI love Dawkins and have read his arguement in his books (which each and every person should read).
ReplyDeleteBut remember, some us us have home schooled raised smart kids who DON'T depend on creation science, the B"abb"le and other BS as fact. We taught our kids logic and reason.
Otherwise, Dawkins kicks ass, what a smart guy!
If having an abortion was never an option, how could she have refused it? Some of these people spend so much time and energy tripping over themselves. Logical they are not.
ReplyDeleteDawkins was great on Family Feud.
ReplyDelete"It is amazing how many people are bamboozled by this spectacularly stupid argument."
ReplyDeleteThat's the ticket. People who disagree with you are "spectacularly stupid." Language is the tool we think with. People who use language like this think like this. To use a metaphor drawn from a paradigm you embrace, people who use language like this self-select their own failure. I don't think you're spectacularly stupid, just clueless and vicous.
Well he never said the person was stupid, just the idea-which it is
DeleteWhy is it always assumed that each ova is a potential life but each sperm is not?
ReplyDeleteAn ova has no more potential for human live than the sperm does.
If the argument is,and it has been for centuries, that each ova lost is a lost life, and therefore a sin for the woman if she does not reproduce like a rodent -it is only a life if it is fertilized.
So any sperm that does not fertilize an ove is also a potential life killed and also a sin.
Not only is the argument specious, sexist and abusive on its face, it is such a wonderful excuse to supress women's right to run their own lives and choose to not have sex and not reproduce.
And men continue to get away with not including themselve in bearing an equal responsibiliy and guilt for reproduction.
If such a debate were to take place (and I agree it would be wondrous to hear), do you really think the Huckabee and Palin bots would understand and accept logical thought?
ReplyDeleteI am an idealist in many ways and a skeptic in many others, but I am a realist when it comes to those who would blindly follow the likes of Mike, Sarah, Cheney, Georgie, and all their clones. They simply do not want to change their minds (see - I can be idealist - am presuming they have real, functioning minds).
And the main point is that Mrs. Tebow had a choice. Her choice give her a physically and mentally healthy child, who will functionally make his parents millionaires.
ReplyDeleteSarh had a choice and her choice give her a child who will be disabled for life. He is already a huge financial burden on the people of Alaska now, and if he survives will be an even greater one when mom and dad are too old to care for him.
And do your really see Sarah dragging him around with her when he is 13 or 30? Wonder where she'll dump him? Probably in one of those socialist mhealth care nursing homes or some similar situation that she doesn't pay for.
What the Tebows and Palins want is to deprive everyone else of the chance to make a choice the way they could.
i still want to know why mr tebow had sex with mrs tebow when she was just in a coma due to some god awful viral infection.
ReplyDeletelet us hear all the reasons his parents decided to have sex that fateful day or night. details please. now THAT would be an appropriate superbowl advertisement.
oh and i love dawkins - his brain, his wit, and his candor.
Dawkins is such a brain... I envy that mind of his.
ReplyDeleteSo by this logic, every time a blow job is given, that's a "child" not given a chance, too, eh?
Spit, swallow or receive. A choice. Right?
Haven't read the article yet but will in a minute.
ReplyDeleteJust got through googling "logical Fallacies." Many university writing courses list the major ones.
No surprise that Palin and ilk are guilty of most of them.
Still, it is nice to remember that their lack of logical, critical thinking actually has a name(s.)
Kinda like being a bit comforted just knowing the name of your mysterious illness even tho you also find out there is no cure LOL
See. it's not just us being biased, she really does not make sense LOL
One of many sites I found:
1. FMU Writing Center - Logical Fallacies
A logical fallacy presents a lapse in the rational sequence of an argument. ... Logical fallacies can destroy the credibility and persuasiveness of your argument. ...
acsweb.fmarion.edu/jenkunka/fallacies.html - Cached
I'm curious as to why he wrote that Tebow's parents had to meet and marry in order for him to be conceived. Obviously, they did not "have to" marry....
ReplyDeleteActually, I thought abortion was illegal in the Philippines, where Ms. Tebow was at the time. (It is classified as a criminal act, resulting in imprisonment for the woman and anyone who assisted with the abortion.) But it appears to happen quite a lot there, though using proccedures which are not regulated and are unsafe .
ReplyDeleteWhy do the pro-life people always have the argument that every aborted fetus was a potential genius? That child could just have easily been the next Hitler or Ted Bundy.
ReplyDeleteHere's the RIGHT people to write to and complain.
ReplyDelete(found at TPMemo)
Tell 'em to PULL THE AD!!
lwade@cbs.com, gwcaraccioli@cbs.com, rlbrendle@CBS.com, jsabatelle@CBS.com
great post gryphen! it sure would be nice if more people in this country used logic in their arguments.
ReplyDeleteAnon. @ 7:36 said
ReplyDelete"That child could just have easily been the next Hitler or Ted Bundy."
Or the next Sarah Palin. (Shudder)
Anon @ 7:36, bravo.
ReplyDeleteOr Grifter Granny Paylin.
I don't remember where I read this - it was just this last week. Seems like the abortion story is all made up. Tebougs mother was in the Philippines when she was preggo with him. In the Philippines - an ARCH-catholic country - NO doctor can and would perform an abortion. It is against the law, and the doctor would go to jail.
ReplyDeleteMade-up story, just like the 'wild ride' of 'our' $arah.
Remember folks, the people that believe the Tebow crap are the same idiots that fell for Kurt Cameron and Banana Man. You remember the video in which Banana Man cites the shape of the Banana indicated God's grand design? I think he went on FAR TOO LONG about how perfectly the banana fits in one's hand and mouth. Hmmm.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that God did not invent the modern banana, man did. The banana is one of the earliest domesticated crops and the God designed wild banana shares none of the attributes - phallic or otherwise - that Banana Man waxed so pervertedly about.
The Talibangelicals are arrogant and ignorant beyond belief. If you don't believe as they do, then you are going to hell.
These folks believe in a vindictive sky wizard that have chosen them as His pets. Their sky wizard is every bit as ignorant and petty as they are and will simply step on you like a bug if you dis His pets. He is a mighty and jealous sky wizard.
Everyone else might as well kiss their asses goodbye. The Bible tells them so.
At 5:50: " 'It is amazing how many people are bamboozled by this spectacularly stupid argument.'
ReplyDeleteThat's the ticket. People who disagree with you are 'spectacularly stupid.' "
No, you missed his point. The ARGUMENT is spectacularly stupid; not the people.
Who of the folks listed in the post - Huckabee, Palin, Dawkins or Romney - would ever admit defeat if their side of the argument were suddenly proven 100% wrong by an as-yet undiscovered, unimpeachable source?
ReplyDeleteMy bet is on Dawkins. Possibly Huckabee. Even more remotely, Romney. But never, ever Palin...
Damn it! Maeve at 10:13 gave the response to Anonymous at 5:50's sniveling complaint about Dawkins's use of the term "spectacularly stupid argument" that I was going to say...and did a much better job than I would.
ReplyDeleteI will add, though, that some arguments are, objectively speaking, "spectacularly stupid"--not because I personally happen to disagree with them, but because those arguments are in fact [insert whatever pejorative term you want]. "Aborting Beethoven" and the USC "philosophy" professor who "proves" there is no god by dropping a piece of chalk are two such arguments.
I write separately, though, because I think Governor Huckabee v. Richard Dawkins debate on abortion would be fascinating to me, but blindingly boring to everyone else. Governor Huckabee has talked at length (to the extent the format of the show will allow) with Jon Stewart about abortion. Huckabee stresses his belief that life begins at conception is based on faith, not science.
I remain:
Still Cranky.
Bill Abendroth
Samsara Samizdat
And as far as Tebow being some great quarterback, did anyone watch his terrible performance in the Senior Bowl? The kid can play IF he has a whole team built around HIM. Just like Plain, he needs a ton of support to even be able to throw a ball down a field. His NFL stock dropped a lot that day, hubby knows the team who wants him and now they are questioning their first choice.
ReplyDeleteThere's lots of other shit in the Tebow closet, like how he and his mom moved to a different school district so he could play on a super strong HS football team. She and Timmeh left the rest of the family in the not so hot HS team's district and got an apartment.
Nice "family" value$ eh?
I am having a fantasy of watching Richard Dawkins debating Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney on the abortion issue.
ReplyDeleteGood grief, he could beat them all with one brain hemisphere tied behind his back.
Of course, he's an actual scientist and knows what he's talking about.
Oh, and Anonymous 6:04 PM, I don't know about other forms of Christianity, but at least in Catholicism, males aren't off the hook. Remember the taboo on masturbation. "Every sperm is sacred!"
As a pro-choice Christian, I always feel I have to "represent" that everyone who is Christian is not fascist cave-man.
ReplyDeleteAs for people believing the Beethoven story, why wouldn't they? This story has been around since the early eighties; I heard it in high school, back in the day when "fact-checking" meant actually doing something besides sitting on your hinder and hitting a keyboard. TBH, I didn't know it *wasn't* true until this moment, but then my pro-choice stance was made on stronger reasoning than "Beethoven."
However, there's some "lore" in this thread that could be fact-checked regarding Christianity. Just like the pro-life crowd who leap on anything that fits their idea, so too do "anti-Christians" leap onto any bit of lore that justifies their vision. I could go into more detail, but I don't want to be accused of proselytizing, which isn't my purpose. My purpose was to point out fact-checking goes both ways.
I agree that this ad is silly, and the argument is specious. People who believe in an all-powerful, omniscient God know that he's capable of carrying out his plans regardless of what we choose. If Tim's birth was some kind of Divine Plan, he would have been born regardless.
The truth is, it doesn't matter whether you think abortion is "right" or "wrong." The point is that you should be able to make your own decision based on your beliefs. To legislate the law based on ONE belief which--as Huckabee admits--is based on faith, is making a law based on a religious belief. That is simply wrong.
Is getting pregnant while in a coma the "Missionary Style?"
ReplyDeleteWell I didn't think you were being too soft on her because I knew you were being dishonest. And the reason I knew is because I figured out O'Reilly's dishonest talking points years ago. Same thing, different political spin.
ReplyDeleteYes, some of we atheists understand that the sperm race thing is the factual analysis but any religious person is probably going to have trouble with it. If they don't have trouble with it then they have pretty much thrown out what remains of their superstitious beliefs.
ReplyDeleteWhile I appreciate Richard Dawkins intelligent comments I think it's also necessary to cater to the religious faction of your readers too and perhaps not mention such 'common sense' issues as that. You're not going to swing them away from their religious superstitious beliefs on this blog Gryphen.
That's for your consumption Gryphen because I doubt that you are going to be able to post it. Too honest for you followers probably.
It might surprise you, Oh Condescending Anon @ 9:41, what some of us "superstitious religious people" know and can understand.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry, Gryph, about Mr. Dawkins' scary science upsetting your followers of faith. He isn't telling me anything I didn't know thirty years ago.
Remember:
"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one . . ."
Alexander Dumas
I have to agree with LisaB's comments about tolerance. I'm not a Christian. That doesn't mean, however, that Jesus' teachings aren't worthwhile. I simply don't believe he was a divine entity.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, what we've seen for the last 30 years is that the version of Christianity that has been popularized is the extreme, militant, right-wing version of it. We shouldn't paint all Christians with the stroke of this brush, although it is hard not to at times.
Frank Schaeffer was on Shannyn Moore's show today. He's got a new book out called, "Patience with God: Faith for Those Who Don't Like Religion (or Atheism)." He was part of the religious right in the early 80's and admits that he got drunk on the power and money. Eventually, he corrected his course and writes about his experiences to educate others about how entrenched this crowd is in the halls of power.
He is hopeful, however, that most will find a middle path between an absolute literal interpretation of the Bible and atheism. I've got a hold on it in our library system, but might have to buy it because I'm impatient to read it.
Here's the Amazon link:
http://www.amazon.com/Patience-God-People-Religion-Atheism/dp/030681854X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1265321385&sr=8-1
Again, I don't want LisaB or other Christians to feel like their religion is being attacked when people comment. Let's do a better job of separating the religion as a whole from the corrupt religious leaders of a particular sect.