Appeal: explicit argument
From DEBATE: TRENT HORN VS. JAY DYER: SHOULD CHRISTIANS ACCEPT NATURAL THEOLOGY?.
- #85913:19upheld Jay Dyer epainos: explicit argument (+2)
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 2 points.
“… because monotheistic religions all claim to believe in one god, it does not follow logically that they believe in or refer to the same god. Again, that is the quantifier shift fallacy. We can think of examples like every girl loves one boy, therefore, girl loves the same boy.”
Diogenes: He names a formal inference, states why it fails, and supplies parallel counterexamples rather than asserting the conclusion.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S1 declared from the opening that natural theology's "generic theism" presupposes a rigid designator for "god" that doesn't hold across monotheistic religions, and this quote is part of that very argument delivered in his opening statement. The quote names a specific formal fallacy (quantifier shift), states the logical form being critiqued, and supplies two parallel counterexamples (girls loving boys, people born of women) to illustrate why the inference fails — this is premises stated plainly leading to a conclusion, textbook explicit argument.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "fallacy spotted", on the same ledger as the callout. Jay correctly states and illustrates the quantifier-shift fallacy (∀x∃y → ∃y∀x) with valid logical examples ("every girl loves one boy" does not entail "the same boy"), and applies it to the generic-theism move that underlies natural-theological arguments like Swinburne's "propositions theists and atheists alike recognize as true," which Trent explicitly invokes moments later in his own opening. This is a correctly-named fallacy tied to a real logical form, not a mere insult. That said, it targets a position Trent hasn't yet stated in this debate (Jay speaks first, citing "I've heard Trent argue many times"), and Trent later directly rebuts the charge with a counter-analogy (every astronomer believing in "one star" yet correctly referring to the same star), so whether it lands on what Trent actually argues remains contested rather than settled by this passage alone.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 opened by denying any generic/rigid-designator "theism" underlying natural theology and has held that position throughout, including this passage, where he names the quantifier-shift fallacy and gives parallel counterexamples (every girl loves one boy; every person born of a woman) to show why "all monotheists believe in one god" doesn't entail "they refer to the same god.". This is a genuine explicit argument: a named formal fallacy, an explanation of why the inference fails, and checkable parallel examples—not a bare assertion. It is consistent with, not a departure from, his opening thesis about rigid vs. flaccid designators.
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.