A Quote by Chris Mooney

The obvious reductio ad absurdum is Holocaust deniers: Should their perspective be provided, for "balance," any time someone writes about the Holocaust? — © Chris Mooney
The obvious reductio ad absurdum is Holocaust deniers: Should their perspective be provided, for "balance," any time someone writes about the Holocaust?
Creationists and Holocaust deniers are both very similar - both are denying what is a perfectly manifest fact. In the case of Holocaust deniers it's more recent history, but in both cases the evidence - in favour of the Holocaust and evolution - is simply overwhelming. That doesn't mean they are morally or politically equivalent. But they are equivalent in denying history.
The reductio ad absurdum is God's favorite argument.
The great German idealists from Kant to Hegel saw this idealism or nihilism as a reductio ad absurdum of any philosophy, and so they struggled by all conceptual means to avoid it.
Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers.
Climate deniers are less immoral than Holocaust deniers, although they are undoubtedly more dangerous.
Why is it, that there's no movies, very little very little attention about the greatest Holocaust in the history of the world which was the Holocaust against Christians by the Soviet communism.And that's my point. We have a controlled media today that talks about the Holocaust, but they don't talk about the death and destruction of tens of millions of Christians...Which was a bigger Holocaust.
There are many more traits that the climate deniers share with the creationists and Holocaust deniers and others who distort the truth.
Combine a left-leaning upbringing with a family with direct experience of the Holocaust and someone with aspirations to write and I guess, sooner or later, that person will have a stab at writing something about the Holocaust.
There are bound to be deniers. Whenever you set up a thesis there's bound to be somebody who comes the opposite way …like Holocaust deniers.
The climate-change deniers are rapidly ending up with as much intellectual credibility as creationists and Flat Earthers. They are nudging close to having the moral credibility of Holocaust deniers.
Reductio ad absurdum, which Euclid loved so much, is one of a mathematician's finest weapons. It is a far finer gambit than any chess play: a chess player may offer the sacrifice of a pawn or even a piece, but a mathematician offers the game.
[talking about the Holocaust] 'But to put something in context is a step towards saying it can be understood and that it can be explained. And if it can be explained that it can be explained away.' 'But this is History. Distance yourselves. Our perspective on the past alters. Looking back, immediately in front of us is dead ground. We don't see it, and because we don't see it this means that there is no period so remote as the recent past. And one of the historian's jobs is to anticipate what our perspective of that period will be... even on the Holocaust.
There is no way a non-Jew could say what I did in 'The Holocaust Industry' without being labelled a Holocaust denier. I am labelled a Holocaust denier, too.
Would the media insist on having a Holocaust-denier to balance any report about the Second Word War?
I believe, and I have always believed, that these events on the occasion of International Holocaust Remembrance Day should take place in Auschwitz and that this is the most important place to commemorate the victims of the Holocaust.
An Inconvenient Truth is so convincing that it makes opposers of the argument as credible as Holocaust deniers.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!