On Our Laughing Masters, and their casual dismissal of reason and logic… when it gets in their way of their thirst for power over you and me.
Atheists and secularists argue that the vast majority of “intellectuals” and scientists are atheists or agnostics, thereby appealing to the “authority” of I.Q., academic position, and the societal favor of science and technology in order to disgrace those who disagree. But this simply commits a fallacious Appeal to Authority. Atheists employ such a fallacy, not to answer a legitimate inquiry, but to shame Christians as unintelligent, dim-wit- ted, and uneducated. Shame is the key factor. In fact, recent atheist Sam Harris openly called upon the use of “embarrassment” as a tool to fight religious faith: “I think we should not underestimate the power of embarrassment.”2 In these comments, Sam openly confesses to the use of the fallacy of an Appeal to Authority (or more clearly in this case, Argument to Shame) in order to further his agenda:
So public embarrassment is one principle. Once you lift the taboo around criticizing faith and demand that people start talking sense, then the capacity for making religious certitude look stupid will be exploited, and we’ll start laughing at people who believe the things that the Tom DeLays, the Pat Robertsons of the world believe. We’ll laugh at them in a way that will be synonymous with excluding them from our halls of power.
Of course, laughter is the ultimate diversion tactic from actual argument. It is the ultimate Appeal to Authority, in which a certain position is assumed to be so authoritative that to argue against it makes one an object of ridicule. The problem arises when the subject in dispute—religion in this case—becomes the assumed basis for ridicule. This again Begs the Question, and leverages emotion and shame in order to persuade (really, to bully) instead of using reasons and argument. If one can incite laughter against a position before proving it wrong, they have committed the fallacy. They may prove victorious in public, but they will have done so at the cost of intellectual integrity. Sam even admits this when he mentions “excluding them from the halls of power,” which exposes the agenda of those who rely on fallacious Appeals to Authority: they are not interested in truth, but power. — Josh McDurmon, Biblical Logic in Theory and Practice, page 249-250
There is a belief system that values Truth over Power: and atheism isn’t that belief system.