1/The motte-and-bailey fallacy: common among evolutionists and CRT.
A motte-and-bailey castle design had a courtyard, the bailey, protected by relatively weak fortifications. If they were breached, the defenders could retreat to the more strongly defended motte.
2/ The bailey was more comfortable and often had markets and gardens, so it& #39;s where people preferred to be if they were not under attack. The motte had no function other than protection.
3/ The fallacy refers to advancing a very controversial position that is weakly defensible (the ‘bailey’). When the defences are breached, the argue retreat to a more defensible and non-controversial claim (the ‘motte’), and pretend that this was their argument all along.
4/ When the pressure is reduced, they return to the ‘bailey’, their indefensible argument.
For example:
Evolutionists: materialism explains everything, including the origin of first life from non-living chemicals (bailey).
5/ Creationists: [devastating counter from known laws of chemistry that evolutionists know they can& #39;t answer]
Evolutionists: evolution just means change of allele frequency over time (retreat to motte, since No ONE denies that allele frequency changes over time!).
You can follow @JonathanSarfat1.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: