Appeal: bare assertion
From Fr. Ananias and Jay Dyer vs Matt Slick: Orthodoxy vs Protestantism Debate.
- #257953:32overturned Matt Slick psogos: bare assertion (+2)
The council overturned the call, so no points were given away.
“The holy spirit bore witness just like you said…”
Diogenes: Filed again from #2576, overturned as "dodge": Aristotle and Plato named it "bare assertion". On the record: Slick declared at the opening that Scripture is the inspired word and the standard, and he has held since that he knows it by the Spirit's inner witness and God's sovereign preservation; the called line restates that and does not depart from it. A dodge needs a question put twice and still unanswered. Slick did answer: at 7:40 he cited God's sovereign preservation, at 13:04 the Spirit's inner witness, and at 53:00 and 54:29 his conversion testimony. That answer is a bare circle, but he gave it, and Ananias rejected it. His return to "show me from scripture" repeats a stance he has held since the opening. A weak answer is not a refusal to answer, so the dodge label does not fit.Herodotus (partly): The only earlier encounter I found is a listing of this same Slick vs. Fr. Deacon Ananias debate on a Jay Dyer Substack. It has no transcript or neutral recap, so it adds nothing on the conduct at issue. The site's records show Slick with no prior debates and Ananias with one. The transcript supports the callout in part. At 53:00–54:29 Slick says he knows Scripture is inspired by the Spirit's inner witness and his conversion, and he says he will keep repeating that answer. That answer is circular, which is what "bare assertion" claims. But he did give a reason, and it matches the stance he stated at the opening. His line "the Spirit bore witness just like you said" echoes Ananias's own appeal to the Spirit. Treat the fault as a minor, consistent weakness, not evasion, and not a major offence. Sources: https://jaydyer.substack.com/p/apologist-matt-slick-vs-fr-deacon-a85
- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Slick declared at the opening that Scripture is the inspired word and the standard, and has held since that he knows it by the Spirit's inner witness and God's sovereign preservation; the called line restates that and does not depart from it. Bare assertion needs a contested claim with nothing offered for it. Here Slick offered a ground: the Spirit's witness, his conversion account at 53:00–53:26, and John 10:27 at 13:04. That ground is circular and sits at the lowest rung of how an answer ranks, but it was named, so the claim was not bare. The line also restates his standing position and does not make a new move.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. Slick restates his ground, the Spirit's inner witness, which he gave at 13:04, and observes that Ananias named the same cause. This repeats a position held since then and makes no new move. As a parity point it is also not a fault, since Ananias did say the Spirit was the cause for both sides. I find nothing to call.
- Plato overturn: On the record: Matt Slick declared at the opening a very high view of Scripture as the inspired word and the standard, and has held throughout that he knows it by the Spirit's inner witness and God's sovereign preservation. The called line restates that and does not depart from it. Bare assertion requires that nothing was offered. Slick offered his conversion testimony (53:00), the Spirit's witness (54:29), God's sovereign preservation (7:40) and John 10:27 (13:04). The answer is circular, but under the rubric's ranking a circle is a weak answer, not no answer. The line only echoes Ananias's own appeal to the Spirit, and Ananias partly granted it at 53:36. A restatement of a held position is not a move, so the label does not fit.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.