What you described is called Steelmanning. It is the opposite of strawmanning.
The idea is to concisely repeat your opponents argument with the most charitable interpretation to see if they disagree with anything, for the purposes of ironing out any misconceptions.
People who cannot steelman are either ignorant, or malicious.
I agree with you. It is important to try to fairly represent the opinions of others. Because once you do, then you can fairly tell them why you believe they’re wrong.
Giving them reasons to doubt God based on flawed assumptions will teach them poor epistemology.
“I don’t believe in God because I’ve never seen him” is not a good reason to believe God isn’t real. There are legitimately good reasons, children must hear them.
What you described is called Steelmanning. It is the opposite of strawmanning.
The idea is to concisely repeat your opponents argument with the most charitable interpretation to see if they disagree with anything, for the purposes of ironing out any misconceptions.
People who cannot steelman are either ignorant, or malicious.
agreed. that’s why i’m saying it’s so important to use it when teaching kids about religion.
Jeez, this sub has not been fair to you :/
I agree with you. It is important to try to fairly represent the opinions of others. Because once you do, then you can fairly tell them why you believe they’re wrong.
Giving them reasons to doubt God based on flawed assumptions will teach them poor epistemology.
“I don’t believe in God because I’ve never seen him” is not a good reason to believe God isn’t real. There are legitimately good reasons, children must hear them.
Most of it were the same guy with multiple accounts.