All Apologies

A prominent contemporary cultural trope is the use of humour by the critics of theism against their opponents, in the form of satire, sarcasm, ‘zingers,’ whimsy, and ridicule. The journalist Christopher Hitchens and the philosophers Daniel Dennett and Galen Strawson are well-known examples from within the cultural and intellectual context of critics that employ the tool of humour. This cultural trope is interesting because it occurs in the academic context as much as popular cultural media such as stand-up comedy and satirical news shows like The Daily Show and Last Week Tonight. This article outlines some ‘ground rules’ for the use of humour as a rhetorical ploy in religious debate. I argue that the use of humour is (1) permitted but (2) ought to be backed by good argumentation when it is used in ‘truth tracking’ contexts. I then use these heuristics to criticise two sorry examples of satire and ridicule employed by the biologist Richard Dawkins and comedian Shaun Micallef

Argumentation theory · Comedy · Malice · Rhetorical device · Rhetorical question · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Humor Studies and Applications · Rhetoric and Communication Studies

• Warranted Christian Belief

  Alvin Plantinga•Warranted Christian belief•2000

  Añadir item

• Critical Essays

  Gilbert Ryle•Collected papers•2009

  Añadir item

• Having a Sense of Humor as a Virtue

  Open Access•Mark Alfano, Mandi Astola et al.•The Journal of Value Inquiry•2022

  Añadir item