The corruptible nature of logic?

[SomeRandom]

What if we were to replace the charged word "preaching" with something more neutral like "promoting a position"? And what if I then said: "I feel like some people are using 'logic and reason' to promoter a position"?

A fair statement. I agree

 

[SomeRandom]

I'm also no US citizen so my information is nearly completely YouTube derived. I see them mostly as a (pseudo) intellectual counter balance to the traditionally left intellectual elite. Some of them have indeed risen together with or as part of new atheism (and now have "found Jesus", as that is where their audience is). Stefan Molyneux would be an example of that.

Oh god “Molymeme.”
I don’t why, but that guy’s cadence bugs me. Maybe it’s because he comes across (to me anyway) as so insufferably smug.
He’s also super creepy to me.

 

[paarsurrey]

So, you guys are familiar with the “Four Horsemen of New Atheism” yeah?

I remember them going on stage to humiliate (whether intentionally or not) their opponents, using logic and reason.

It was probably more spectacle than actual debate in hindsight. Ostensibly they wanted to champion intellectualism and scientific literacy. Which is pretty noble, right?

But I’ve noticed that people, public figure and laymen alike, seem to use logic more as a bludgeon than a tool for interpreting reality. They pick an ideal to live and die by (often freedom of speech, if I’m honest.) Proudly boasting at how they are using logic and reason to battle against X.
Think figures like Jordan Peterson, for example. Or I dunno Ben Shapiro.

But there also seems to be very little nuance to the world views being championed, imo. It’s just peacocking.
The aesthetics of logic and reason but without any real humanity to it. I see it in some New Atheism groups. Logic and reason they claim. But still try desperately to justify old hierarchies and human prejudices.
It’s almost dogmatic. And ends up being used to dehumanise their “opponents.” Effectively eliminating empathy and becoming an exercise in futility.
It becomes a sport instead of a debate. More about winning. I saw this happen in 2016, with many “owning the libs/SJWs” with logic and reason. But no actual debate, no free exchange of ideas. Even though that was allegedly a desired goal.

What are your thoughts?
Because I feel like some people are using “logic and reason” as preaching tools rather than utilising their benefits. Does that make sense?

"some New Atheism groups "

Just for information, please.
Do some or a group of Atheists say they belong to New Atheism, please?

Regards

 

[SomeRandom]

"some New Atheism groups "

Just for information, please.
Do some or a group of Atheists say they belong to New Atheism, please?

Regards

Some do. Some distance themselves from the label. Depends on who you ask

 

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said: ↑
"some New Atheism groups "
Just for information, please.
Do some or a group of Atheists say they belong to New Atheism, please?

Some do. Some distance themselves from the label. Depends on who you ask

Friend @leroy has suggested "The Atheist Method":
vide post #159-
1 avoid the burden proof at all cost
2 never answer questions directly clearly and unambiguously
3 apply unrealistically high standards with claims that support the existence of God
4 just claim "god of the gaps" when you cant answer to a specific line of evidence.
5 never accept nor deny a specific claim, keep your position ambiguous
6 never provide your specific points of disagreement for an argument
Further points collected by me from various posts-
" One can use ridiculous atheist logic to dismiss any claim." #176
leroy wrote, "you what to ridicule my position rather than providing serious arguments is very telling," #707
Points from this thread about New/Neo Atheists-
#1 "Because I feel like some people are using “logic and reason” as preaching tools rather than utilising their benefits. Does that make sense?
#7 "Not so much logic as debate skill. They are not there to find common ground, unless it lets them win the debate. An ability to turn your opponent's argument against them. They are basically entertainers."
#12 "Okay. I’m not talking about atheists, but “New Atheists.” Self styled debaters who seemingly champion logic and reason. Inspired by the “four horsemen.” Actually iirc that was one of the main criticisms of them back in the day. More interested in using “logic” as a tool to sell their brand of Atheism."
Right, please?

Regards