For the complete debate with materialists see this list

The logical fallacies of the pseudo rationalist crowd:

I am going to enumerate a list of most common logical fallacies and compare the statements of the pseudo rationalists to see where they stand.


argumentum ad numerum
If you think you are right because you are among the majority please know that this is called argumentum ad numerum and it is a logical fallacy. Majority has often been wrong.


Argumentum ad populum
If you think the position of pseudo rationalists is more popular and “respectable” please know that this is called argumentum ad populum and it too is a logical fallacy.


Argumentum ad verecundiam
If your excuse is that some renowned authorities in science share the same beliefs and hence they know better, please know that appeal to authority or argumentum ad verecundiam is another logical fallacy. Just as Newton's religious beleifs are no proof to the truth of his religious belief, the fact that some scientists are materialists does not prove materialism is right.


Argumentum ad logicam
If your obstacle is the stupid statements made by some proponents of paranormal, (e.g. Van Praagh says skeptics are dangerous) then know that this is called argumentum ad logicam and it too is a logical fallacy. A thesis does not become invalid just because someone says something stupid in its support, especially if other explanations are irrefutable. (e.g. animal acupuncture)


Argumentum ad nauseam
An argument does not become true if it is repeated. This is called argumentum ad nauseam. 

Example: "All the evidence of paranormal is anecdotal and there is a million dollar prize for anyone who can prove them." 

There are many evidences of paranormal that are not anecdotal and that million dollar prize is a mentalist’s stunt. If James Randi was honest, he should pay that money to the American Veterinary Medical Association that has evidence that acupuncture works even on animals or he should convince them that animal acupuncture is fraud.


Non Sequitur
Non Sequitur is another logical fallacy of pseudo rationalists. 

Example: "The claim of paranormal is anecdotal and hence we do not need to think about it." 

This is of course a fallacy. Psychosomatic diseases are all generated in the mind but not because of that they become unimportant. Even if a claim cannot be tested with scientific instruments, it does not mean it should be dismissed as hocus pocus.


dicto simpliciter
This is the fallacy of making a sweeping statement and expecting it to be true on every specific case -- in other words, stereotyping.

 Example: "Several psychics have been found to be playing tricks. Ergo all psychics are tricksters."

Red herring
Another logical fallacy often used by pseudo rationalists is red herring. This means introducing irrelevant facts or arguments to distract from the question at hand. Example: 

“I am a mentalist and I can fool people that I can do cold reading.” 

The art of magicians and mentalists has nothing to do with psychic power or paranormal.


Straw man
Straw man is another fallacy used by pseudo rationalists. 

Example: “Psychics cannot predict the lottery number and they can’t prevent the disaster in their own lives therefore psychic power is false.” 

No one said predicting the lottery number is one of the functions of the psychics or that psychics are omnipotent.


argumentum ad ridiculum
Last but not least is the weapon of the loser and that is argumentum ad ridiculum or in plain English appeal to mockery and horse laugh. This of course has no intellectual value and serves only as a feel good factor for the loser.



As one can see in this long and tedious debate, there has been virtually no rule of logic left unbroken by the proponents of materialism. Ironically they like to be called rationalists.