I have a tendency (and maybe you do too) to decide what to make of something solely on the basis of “who said it.” I confess it’s a cheap shortcut. It lets me avoid actually thinking about whether or not a thing is good or bad, right or wrong, true or false.
It’s not always a bad thing. As C. S. Lewis wrote in his essay, Why I Am Not A Pacifist, it’s inevitable that we look to credible authorities for many beliefs we hold:
Of every hundred facts upon which to reason, ninety-nine depend on authority… Few of us have followed the reasoning on which even ten percent of the truths we believe are based. We accept them on authority from the experts and are wise to do so, for though we are thereby sometimes deceived, yet we should have to live like savages if we did not. (The Weight of Glory, pp. 66-67)
So hopefully we can agree that while going on the basis of credible authority is a necessary evil, it is better, whenever possible, to make our own wise, good, and godly decisions about the ideas we encounter. Christ is honored when we engage in the discipleship of the mind and develop better thinking skills to deal with all that the world is going to throw at us.
To that end, I’m starting a series of occasional posts under the heading “Who Said It?” Sometimes the quotes will come from Christians, sometimes from hostile enemies of the Gospel. Could be anybody. (Kim Riddlebarger does a similar thing on his blog.) My goal is not to run a trivia contest, but to encourage careful thinking about what people think and say.
You may wonder: why ask the question, “who said it,” if I’m really interested in what was said? You got me—it’s a cheap trick. You can’t very well guess who said it unless you think about what was said!
So: to kick things off… who said it? (Googling the answer is cheating!)
The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.
Without knowing who it is, do you agree or disagree? Why?
Hugh,
While having a poor argument for your belief is tragic, I don’t know if I would agree that that is the most perfidious way. In my opinion, I would say the most damaging way to defend a cause is to talk about it and in your character or actions not live it out. I guess, be a hypocrite.
I’m sure someone really noble made this quote and I am going to feel like a real fool when you reveal their identity (Smile).
-Vicki
Them there words was uttered by none other than Donald Duck. Yep.
Nice answer Vicki. I think they are both good ways to undermine a cause.
It’s hard to guess who might have said it because anyone who values making a reasoned case for a cause or belief might say such a thing. This is one of those areas where I often feel more kinship with an honest atheist (who will at least argue on the merits of the case) than a pluralist or relativist for whom everything is utterly subjective.
So, I’ll guess J.P. Moreland or Bertrand Russell. How’s that for hedging? 🙂
I chuckle at the picture of Donald saying “Perfidious” three times fast. There’s a lot of spit there!
As a science teacher, I know this is done by scientists who are supposed to be objective observers of the physical world, but who in reality bring in their worldview in absolute insistence that we can only believe things that are physical. In reality this viewpoint is philosophical in nature and cannot be supported by science, since science can only deal with the physical realm and not the spiritual. Science will always be limited by the interpretation of man who is fallible. We will always view what we observe based upon our own frame of reference, our worldview.
The quote you presented, Hugh, speaks of those who deliberately defend a cause with faulty arguments, but it has been my experience that people on both sides of the creation vs. evolution debate ignorantly defend their viewpoint with faulty arguments. Perhaps, it is because we are so sure that we (humans in general) are correct in our claims, that when a new ‘finding’ comes along that supports our viewpoint, we may not even checkout the validity of the claims… which goes back to your original post: we fail to check for truth (especially if we respect the person who said it, but more often if it confirms our own beliefs from our own perspective).
Anyone can see truth in this statement whether or not they ascribe to the author’s beliefs, because most of us have heard people use unsound claims to substantiate their ideas. These same people fail to realize how they are weakening the support for their idea, because they use arguments that are flawed. So it would stand to reason that as Christians we need to be prepared to give sound reasons for the hope that we have in Christ Jesus in order that, though we stand on Truth, the Truth may be clearly presented not just in creation, but through consistent study and a transformed life – which only occur through the power of the Holy Spirit, the gift of God to those who place their hope of salvation in Christ Jesus alone.
Who said it? The answer is…
Friedrich Nietzsche, the German philosopher most famous for his pronouncement that “God is dead, and we have killed him.”
My $0.02… I agree with Nietzsche. I would much rather have people on “my side” remain silent rather than put forward a case that holds no water… it amounts to damage I have to undo before I can make my own case.
Thanks to all who commented. For what it’s worth, Vicki, I was most intrigued by your comment. It reminds me of something Francis Schaeffer said about our lives being the ultimate apologetic for what we believe. If Schaeffer’s right, our lives may be the most important “argument” we can make for the cause of Christ in a world where God’s word is dismissed. If the way we live is inconsistent with our profession, then we damage the Gospel. So I think you’re right — but I also think what you say is consistent with the spirit of the quote!
Check out the next quote!