> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy

> On Jul 3, 10:53 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On Jul 3, 10:28 am, MrCool <tarj_saho...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > I agree with your first sentence but it all goes wrong from there.
> > > Secular morality isn't about respecting each other's wants.  People
> > > have all sorts of crazy wants.  Nothing in game theory suggests that I
> > > should respect a paedophiles want to rape a child.  So your argument
> > > rests on a faulty supposition.

> > Actually I'm ok with most of it. The problem lies in what is are
> > "benign theist beliefs"? Walt assumes they exist because he shuts his
> > eyes to the ways that the mere belief in god is faulty and malicious.

> > Also, Walt over simplifies the relationship between moderate theists
> > and extreme theists and misses how the former lends support to the
> > latter.

> > Take the most extreme fundamentalist Christian and the most liberal
> > unitarian Christian. You might not expect the fundamentalist to be
> > able to derive any sort of support of the liberal. Yet it is easy to
> > imagine:

> > Let's say fundamentalism can be rated on a scale of 1 to 100 with 1
> > being theists you never hear about because they aren't being rabidly
> > evangelical and generally keep their religion to themselves and 100
> > being Falwell.

> > Now, putting a 1 and a 100 together will highlight obvious differences
> > and they probablly will argue and fight as much as any atheist vs.
> > theist. But that's not how it works, despiute Walt's attempts to
> > depict it that way.

> > Distribution of theist population on this scale would most likely be a
> > bell curve, putting more people in the center (50) than at either
> > extreme.

> > Another concept to introduce is "birds of a feather flock together"
> > Religion is a social group and groupings will most likely have those
> > of similar fundamental ratings.

> > And finally there is the fact that the fundamentalists get a
> > disproportionate amount of media. They are more vocal and active.

> > Put these together and you have a 100 in a group with some 99's, more
> > 98's, even more 97's, etc. etc. Now, the 99 won't agree with
> > everything the 100 says, but 99% of it. The 99s lend support to the
> > 100s, the 98s to the 99s, the 97s to the 96s, and so one. Since the
> > higher up you go the more vocal you go, it will appear that the 100s
> > are in charge.

> > But that's all just appearances, right? No. Being so alike in thought
> > a 99 will agree with, and pretty act in according with the beliefs of
> > the 100, because their beliefs are pretty much the same. Where they
> > differ the difference is slight and, being more vocal and active, it
> > is no small task for the 100 to convince the 99 that his way is right,
> > even if only temporarily. This goes down the chain from 99 to 98, from
> > 98 to 97, etc. etc. Now, at some point it fizzles out, but by that
> > time you will have had an extreme minority (the 100s) having had
> > influence a larger, less extreme population (99-).

> > The problem is, given the smooth, gradual spectrum you just can
> > eliminate one portion. Take away all the 100s and you've just merely
> > created NEW 100s (the old 99s) on a recalibrated scale.

> > Lastly, appearances are significant, especially in the views of the
> > 100s. Even if their extreme directives do not filter down to the 1s,
> > the lack of response (positive or negative) from the lower extremes is
> > simply assumed to be tacit consent. They think themselves as having
> > the support of all, and act accordingly.

> > Even outside religious concerns Walts description of secular morality
> > is crude, at best. Stealing a candy has little effect on society.
> > Candy bars are numerous and cheap, so stealing one doesn't
> > significantly affect the wants of any other people. Thus, according to
> > Walt's morality here, we should not make stealing candybars a crime.
> > The issue here is that Walt is only considering single instances and
> > evaluating them isolated from other concerns. Rather he should be
> > evaluating things as what would happen if everyone was allowed to do
> > it.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -