Behold, Robert hath descended from the heavens, and his purpose was to rid the world of stupidity, but the world rejected his teachings! GREAT WOE!
Today I will conclusively prove to you how this post is complete and utter nonsense. Hopefully the author of the post will have a change of mind toward a healthier, more logical mindset as a consequence.
This is the first statement, right out of the gate:
“Faith is the assertion of truth without evidence, and always contradicts reason.”
Faith is not asserting anything, but it is believing with or without evidence. It is independent of evidence. Under certain circumstances someone’s faith is wanting for evidence, and under others it is not. Therefore, faith must not necessarily contradict reason, as one can have faith in reasonable things. It can also conflict with reason. In this case, the author’s faith in his own mental faculties has clearly shrouded his judgement when it comes to simple logic; everything is not black and white. You made a false dichotomy, ~~maaaan~~.
I will continue hitting this hard until whatever it is that possessed him to write such nonsense is dead.
His second swing is taken:
“When you accept articles of faith you submit to authority and turn your brain off because you can never reason through to the submitted conclusions. In fact it is understood as necessary to degrade and dehumanize your oppositions.”
Here is yet another false dichotomy. Accepting an article of faith does not necessarily mean that you can’t reason through it’s submitted conclusions, nor that the article itself is unreasonable.
As for the second statement, I can only point out his own hypocricy:
“The absurd circular arguments offered by the religious because they are by definition mentally deranged and are dangerous to everyone because of the rejection of reason.”
You’ve already rejected reason twice, and now you call religious people mentally deranged. Surely you can’t be so blind as to not see yourself in the mirror?
Not only this, but he does not make a single argument throughout the post… only statements and conclusions. Perhaps we are simply to accept them as authority?
Oh, but I forgot. He most likely has the ~The Science~ on his side. Obviously we needn’t hassle with such things as logic or reason when confronted with ~The Science~.
TL;DR? This guy sums it up nicely: