Redeeming illogic with evidence:
|When a proponent of a concept demonstrated to be logically impossible continues to offer evidence for that concept.||I have a golden square triangle instead of a heart beating in my chest, and I have the lab analysis to prove it.|
|If someone claims to have a golden square triangle in their chest, and provides gold flakes or a lab analysis as evidence, you don’t have to test the gold flakes or scrutinize the lab analysis for authenticity before you dismiss the notion that they have a golden square triangle in their chest. If a concept has been demonstrated to be illogical, no amount of evidence will salvage that concept.
To a lesser degree, what we define as physical impossibilities can be dismissed in the same way we can dismiss logical impossibilities. However, we must be careful since what is physical laws have been abstracted from nature by humans, and may not be absolute. However, this caveat does not mean we are wrong to dismiss with a high degree of confidence any concept that science considers a physical impossibility.
Case Study One
Some theists define their god as both loving and yet behaving towards those he presumably loves with actions humans would never call “loving”. We need not scrutinize their holy book or nature for evidence of such an incoherent god. If there is evidence for a creator, that god need not be considered as a candidate for that creator since he has been disqualified by the logical incoherence in his description.
Keep in mind that a fallacious argument does not entail an erroneous position.