✓ The Stepping-Stone Fallacy

Key Points

The Stepping-Stone Fallacy, where theists selectively quote non-theists to support their arguments, is common in online theistic debates.
Figures like Einstein, Hawking, and Darwin are often misquoted, creating a misleading chain of support for theism.
This fallacy is used to bolster credibility, though interpretations can vary, reflecting ongoing debate.

Overview

The Stepping-Stone Fallacy occurs when individuals cherry-pick specific points from authorities they generally disagree with, like non-theists, to build a chain of support for their theistic arguments. This creates a false sense of credibility, often misrepresenting the original views. Below, we explore examples found online, focusing on how these quotes are used and misused.

Examples and Analysis

Here are instances where this fallacy appears in theistic arguments, with verbatim quotes and their contexts:

Albert Einstein: Theists often quote, “The more I study science, the more I believe in God,” to suggest he supported theism. However, Einstein clarified he did not believe in a personal God, stating in a 1954 letter, “The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses” (Religious and philosophical views of Albert Einstein – Wikipedia).
Stephen Hawking: Theists misuse, “Because there are laws such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” to imply a lawgiver, ignoring Hawking’s atheism, as he said, “It is not necessary to invoke God” (What Stephen Hawking said about God, his atheism and his own death – The Washington Post).
Charles Darwin: Theists cite, “I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God,” to claim theistic belief, but Darwin later identified as agnostic, saying, “an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind” (Religious views of Charles Darwin – Wikipedia).
Carl Sagan: Theists might use, “I would love to believe that when I die I will live again,” to suggest openness to afterlife, ignoring his conclusion, “I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking” (Carl Sagan Quotes (Author of Cosmos) – Goodreads).
Richard Dawkins: Theists quote, “It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved . . . and designed a form of life,” applying it to fine-tuning, while Dawkins is an atheist, speculating about aliens, not God (The Fine-Tuning of the Universe: What Does It Mean? – Richard E. Simmons III).
Thomas Nagel: Theists use, “The defenders of intelligent design deserve our gratitude,” to suggest support, but Nagel remains an atheist, critiquing materialism without endorsing theism (Noted Atheist Philosopher Thomas Nagel: “Defenders of Intelligent Design Deserve Our Gratitude” | Evolution News).

Each case shows selective agreement, ignoring the broader context, fitting the Stepping-Stone Fallacy.

The Stepping-Stone Fallacy in Theistic Arguments

This note provides a detailed examination of the Stepping-Stone Fallacy in theistic arguments found online, focusing on how theists selectively quote non-theists to create a misleading chain of support. The analysis includes verbatim quotes, contexts, and categorizations, aiming to mirror professional articles with a strict superset of the content above.

Introduction

The Stepping-Stone Fallacy, as described, involves selectively adopting specific positions from authorities, particularly non-theists, to bolster theistic arguments, despite fundamental misalignment. This tactic creates an illusion of credibility by piecing together cherry-picked points, often misrepresenting the original views. Given the prevalence of online debates, this survey identifies and analyzes examples, focusing on figures like Einstein, Hawking, Darwin, Sagan, Dawkins, and Nagel, whose quotes are frequently misused.

Methodology

This investigation searched for instances where theists cite non-theists in arguments for God’s existence, particularly focusing on phrases like “even atheists admit” and specific figures known for misquotation.

Detailed Examples

Albert Einstein

Verbatim Quote Used by Theists: “The more I study science, the more I believe in God.“
Context: This quote, often attributed, aligns with Einstein’s statements like, “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe — a spirit vastly superior to that of man,” from a 1936 letter to a student. However, Einstein’s religious views, detailed in Religious and philosophical views of Albert Einstein – Wikipedia, clarify he was not a theist but a pantheist, believing in a Spinozian God, not a personal deity.
Misuse: Theists use this to suggest Einstein’s belief in a personal God, aligning with theistic views, ignoring his 1954 letter stating, “The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses.”
Categorization as Stepping-Stone Fallacy: This fits by selectively quoting Einstein’s “God” references, ignoring his rejection of a personal deity, creating a false chain of support for theism.

Stephen Hawking

Verbatim Quote Used by Theists: “Because there are laws such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.“
Context: From “The Grand Design,” Hawking argues the universe’s emergence via physical laws, as noted in What Stephen Hawking said about God, his atheism and his own death – The Washington Post. He explicitly states, “It is not necessary to invoke God,” reflecting his atheism.
Misuse: Theists interpret this to mean laws imply a lawgiver, suggesting God, despite Hawking’s clear rejection.
Categorization as Stepping-Stone Fallacy: By focusing on laws without acknowledging Hawking’s atheistic conclusion, theists misrepresent, fitting the fallacy.

Charles Darwin

Verbatim Quote Used by Theists: “I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.“
Context: From a 1879 letter, Darwin also said, “I think that generally (& more and more so as I grow older) but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind,” as per Religious views of Charles Darwin – Wikipedia. His views evolved from Christianity to agnosticism.
Misuse: Theists claim this shows Darwin’s theistic belief, ignoring his agnosticism, to align evolution with theism.
Categorization as Stepping-Stone Fallacy: Selective focus on non-atheism, ignoring agnosticism, misrepresents his position, fitting the fallacy.

Carl Sagan

Verbatim Quote Used by Theists: “I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue.“
Context: From “The Demon-Haunted World,” Sagan continues, “But as much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking,” as seen in Carl Sagan Quotes (Author of Cosmos) – Goodreads. He was effectively an atheist, skeptical of afterlife.
Misuse: Theists use the desire part to suggest openness to afterlife, implying theistic leanings.
Categorization as Stepping-Stone Fallacy: Omitting the skeptical conclusion misrepresents Sagan, fitting the fallacy.

Richard Dawkins

Verbatim Quote Used by Theists: “It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved . . . to a very, very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto, perhaps, this planet.“
Context: From an interview, Dawkins discusses alien design of life, not universe fine-tuning, as per The Fine-Tuning of the Universe: What Does It Mean? – Richard E. Simmons III. He is an atheist, rejecting God.
Misuse: Theists extend this to fine-tuning, suggesting design by God, ignoring his atheistic stance.
Categorization as Stepping-Stone Fallacy: Misapplying to fine-tuning, ignoring context, fits the fallacy.

Thomas Nagel

Verbatim Quote Used by Theists: “The defenders of intelligent design deserve our gratitude for challenging a scientific world view that owes some of the passion displayed by its adherents precisely to the fact that it is thought to liberate us from religion.“
Context: From “Mind and Cosmos,” Nagel critiques materialism, citing ID proponents, but remains an atheist, as per Noted Atheist Philosopher Thomas Nagel: “Defenders of Intelligent Design Deserve Our Gratitude” | Evolution News. He proposes non-theistic alternatives.
Misuse: Theists suggest Nagel supports ID or theism, ignoring his atheism.
Categorization as Stepping-Stone Fallacy: Selective quoting ignores his non-theistic stance, fitting the fallacy.

Discussion

Each example demonstrates selective agreement, ignoring broader contexts, creating a chain of support from inconsistent sources. This aligns with the fallacy’s impact: misrepresentation, false credibility, and audience confusion. The prevalence online, especially in debates, underscores the need for context in evaluating arguments.

Table: Summary of Examples

	Quote	Overlooked	Status	Fallacy
Albert Einstein	“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.”	Suggests personal God belief, ignores pantheism.	Pantheist, rejected personal God.	Selective quoting, ignores rejection of theism.
Stephen Hawking	“Because there are laws such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself.”	Implies lawgiver, ignores atheistic conclusion.	Atheist, no need for God.	Focuses on laws, ignores no-God stance.
Charles Darwin	“I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.”	Claims theistic belief, ignores agnosticism.	Agnostic, uncertain about God.	Highlights non-atheism, ignores agnostic identity.
Carl Sagan	“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again.”	Suggests openness to afterlife, ignores skepticism.	Effectively atheist, no afterlife.	Omits skeptical conclusion, misrepresents stance.
Richard Dawkins	“It could be that at some earlier time, a civilization evolved . . . and designed life.”	Extends to fine-tuning, suggests God, ignores alien speculation.	Atheist, rejects God, speculates aliens.	Misapplies to fine-tuning, ignores atheistic context.
Thomas Nagel	“The defenders of intelligent design deserve our gratitude.”	Suggests support for ID/theism, ignores atheism.	Atheist, critiques materialism non-theistically.	Selective quoting, ignores non-theistic alternative.

Conclusion

This survey highlights six robust examples of the Stepping-Stone Fallacy in theistic arguments online, each demonstrating selective quoting to create false credibility. The findings emphasize the importance of context in debates, particularly on sensitive topics like religion and science, ensuring arguments are evaluated based on merit, not misrepresentation.

Key Citations

Hypothetical Extended Stepping-Stone Argument

Here’s a hypothetical argument that starts with fine-tuning quotes and ends with the resurrection of Jesus, using selective quoting to create a chain of tenuous steps:

#01: Starting with Fine-Tuning

The argument begins with, “Even the atheist astronomer Martin Rees says, ‘The laws of physics seem remarkably fine-tuned to allow for life,’ suggesting a creator” (Martin Rees on Fine-Tuning). This ignores Rees’s views on multiverse theories, misrepresenting his stance.

#02: Linking to Philosophical Critique

Next, it jumps to, “Philosopher Thomas Nagel, also an atheist, argues, ‘The defenders of intelligent design deserve our gratitude,’ implying materialism is insufficient” (Thomas Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos). This selectively quotes Nagel, who critiques materialism but remains an atheist, not endorsing theism.

#03: Connecting to Deistic Belief

Then, it claims, “Former atheist Antony Flew said, ‘I now believe there is a God… based on recent scientific discoveries,’ showing even atheists can come to believe” (Antony Flew’s Conversion). This misuses Flew’s deism, as he didn’t accept Christianity or the resurrection.

#04: Moving to Biblical Reliability

The chain continues with, “Historian Bart Ehrman, not a Christian, acknowledges, ‘There is no doubt that Jesus of Nazareth existed and was crucified,’ supporting the Bible’s reliability” (Bart Ehrman on Jesus). This ignores Ehrman’s denial of the resurrection, misrepresenting his view.

#05: Ending with the Resurrection

Finally, it concludes, “Skeptical scholar Gerd Ludemann admits, ‘The disciples had experiences they interpreted as appearances of the risen Jesus,’ thus supporting the resurrection” (Gerd Ludemann on the Resurrection). This misrepresents Ludemann, who attributes these to visions, not a physical resurrection.

This chain exemplifies the Stepping-Stone Fallacy, with each step selectively quoting to create a misleading path from fine-tuning to the resurrection of Jesus.

Unexpected Detail

An unexpected twist is how the argument jumps from scientific fine-tuning to historical claims, using non-theists’ quotes in ways they likely wouldn’t endorse, highlighting the fallacy’s deceptive nature.

Hypothetical Stepping-Stone Argument in Theistic Debates

This note provides a detailed examination of a hypothetical extended Stepping-Stone Fallacy argument, starting with fine-tuning quotes and ending with the resurrection of Jesus, focusing on how selective quoting creates a misleading chain of support. The analysis includes verbatim quotes, contexts, and categorizations, aiming to mirror professional articles with a strict superset of the content above.