If you don’t mind, please let honor respond without your meddling. You tend to throw things off track without actually engaging in the discussion.
I’d like to leave my post intact without your interference. If honor has a problem responding to my post...as is...let him be the one to say so. He doesn’t need a nanny.
Please bow out unless you can add something substantive to the discussion.
He includes 3 and 4 as primary questions, he doesn’t say 2, and then 3 and 4 rely on 1.
But honor already pointed that out
Thank you, Lemmie.
You’re welcome, I hope I’m not intruding! One fascinating lesson I’ve learned from these discussions is that you always have to check the links. And the footnotes. And the references.
(Anecdotally, in an Early Modern English thread over at MDD I was reading recently, an apologist asserted he had definitively proved some anachronism to not be so, and gave a link to the paper that he said contained his proof. Curious, I followed the link, and within the body of his paper, he indeed asserted having proved an issue, on the basis of (Ostensibly peer-reviewed and published) scholarly resources. The sentence asserting such Scholarly resources was footnoted, and when I looked at the footnote, I found that the Scholarly resource supporting his assertion of proof.... was a previous paper he himself had self-published! I didn’t follow the trail any further. You really can’t make this stuff up.)
Last edited by Guest on Sun Aug 16, 2020 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Again, it seems to me you keep calling immoveable beliefs made inaccessible to scrutiny "questions". No one is seeking truth who is doing what the video describes. It's just confirming biases.
So, you up for discussing evidence yet?
The first of the primary questions Elder Corbridge asks is whether or not there is a Father in Heaven. This would also be the primary ‘purple’ from your questionnaire as far as I can surmise. Everything else, in one way or another, hinges on that.
First...do you agree?
If so, how would you determine what evidence for a Father in Heaven would meet your criteria for acceptable evidence?
What would I have to either show or demonstrate to you?
Regard,
MG
It's not about demonstrating to me. It's about answering the question in a defensible way that gives your approach to assigning probabilities consistency.
I keep saying this over and over, but you assign the highest of probabilities, even certainty, to statements that we have come to agree lack any means of verifying they deserve that degree of confidence.
So what you'd need to show is that those statements - based on something you can't or won't share - deserve such high probabilities compared to other statements where we are comfortable examining actual evidence that both of us can access.
You need to show that your certitude isn't a precondition of holding Mormon beliefs and then forcing the world to conform to that worldview that is apparently immune to examination using evidence.
You need to show you can be consistent with how you seek out the truth.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Not at all. Given my amateur dabbling in topics like probability where you are clearly more qualified, I'm glad for any participation that steers the conversation towards more sound conclusions and approaches.
One fascinating lesson I’ve learned from these discussions is that you always have to check the links. And the footnotes. And the references.
Amen.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Again, it seems to me you keep calling immoveable beliefs made inaccessible to scrutiny "questions". No one is seeking truth who is doing what the video describes. It's just confirming biases.
So, you up for discussing evidence yet?
The first of the primary questions Elder Corbridge asks is whether or not there is a Father in Heaven. This would also be the primary ‘purple’ from your questionnaire as far as I can surmise. Everything else, in one way or another, hinges on that.
First...do you agree?
If so, how would you determine what evidence for a Father in Heaven would meet your criteria for acceptable evidence?
What would I have to either show or demonstrate to you?
The first of the primary questions Elder Corbridge asks is whether or not there is a Father in Heaven. This would also be the primary ‘purple’ from your questionnaire as far as I can surmise. Everything else, in one way or another, hinges on that.
First...do you agree?
If so, how would you determine what evidence for a Father in Heaven would meet your criteria for acceptable evidence?
What would I have to either show or demonstrate to you?
The first of the primary questions Elder Corbridge asks is whether or not there is a Father in Heaven. This would also be the primary ‘purple’ from your questionnaire as far as I can surmise. Everything else, in one way or another, hinges on that.
First...do you agree?
If so, how would you determine what evidence for a Father in Heaven would meet your criteria for acceptable evidence?
What would I have to either show or demonstrate to you?
Regard,
MG
It's not about demonstrating to me. It's about answering the question in a defensible way that gives your approach to assigning probabilities consistency.
I keep saying this over and over, but you assign the highest of probabilities, even certainty, to statements that we have come to agree lack any means of verifying they deserve that degree of confidence.
So what you'd need to show is that those statements - based on something you can't or won't share - deserve such high probabilities compared to other statements where we are comfortable examining actual evidence that both of us can access.
You need to show that your certitude isn't a precondition of holding Mormon beliefs and then forcing the world to conform to that worldview that is apparently immune to examination using evidence.
You need to show you can be consistent with how you seek out the truth.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
The first of the primary questions Elder Corbridge asks is whether or not there is a Father in Heaven. This would also be the primary ‘purple’ from your questionnaire as far as I can surmise. Everything else, in one way or another, hinges on that.
First...do you agree?
If so, how would you determine what evidence for a Father in Heaven would meet your criteria for acceptable evidence?
What would I have to either show or demonstrate to you?
