Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I don't believe that your sincerity has suddenly changed, and I doubt you will find many Christians who do.Please accept my apology if anything I said has proven offensive. I assure you it was quite inadvertent.
Oh, bull. It was clear from the outset that it was a paraphrase. Grow up.Don't apologize as if you care anything about what you just did. You knowingly did it, you intentionally tried to hide it. You are a complete fraud. And all this about you turning into the credible hulk is a mockery upon yourself.
So, do you know that Santa exists in the same epistemological way that Descartes "knows" that he, and thereafter, God exists? Or do you know in a way similar to how I 'know' that Satan exists? (see my other thread if you need help in boosting your further thought on this.)The wrong one. I'm not asking if Santa exists. I know he does. But it seems there are some people, strange as it may seem, who think I'm mistaken. And yet they can't - or won't - say why.
You keep missing the mark, Philo. All you have to do is explain why you think Santa doesn't exist. With the exception of a few trifling remarks, you haven't even attempted this, leaving me rather confused why you think he doesn't.
I know that Santa exists in the same way that I know my colleagues exist, or my wife, or Barack Obama.
No idea. I don't really fully understand what "epistemological process" means. I just know that Santa is real.And by which epistemological process do you do this precisely?
No idea. I don't really fully understand what "epistemological process" means. I just know that Santa is real.
Millions of people can confirm Santa's visits every year. And I can only tell you if I have an epistemological process or not if you tell me what they are.So, you have no epistemological process or choice of processes by which you generally attempt to justify this or that 'truth' in your everyday life or when doing anything else?
I'm kind of incredulous about your point of view here, if I do say so myself. I would think that someone such as yourself, apparently with a claim that your stocking(s) are hung by the chimney with care, gets your stocking stuffed at least once a year and that it would be something we'd all be able to confirm then, right? If not, then which "Santa" are you believing in?
Millions of people can confirm Santa's visits every year. And I can only tell you if I have an epistemological process or not if you tell me what they are.
By the way, you must excuse me now. It's bedtime where I am.
Millions of people can confirm Santa's visits every year. And I can only tell you if I have an epistemological process or not if you tell me what they are.
By the way, you must excuse me now. It's bedtime where I am.
And why would you do that? Are you suggesting that I'm arguing in bad faith?
And as to what I think I'm demonstrating, I'm puzzled you'd ask. Have you not seen the title of this thread? As @BigV said, "It's a serious question about the methodology used to determine the difference between a real person and a fiction."
Sorry, back now. A busy day!...then when you wake up in the morning, you can begin your first school assignment by reading chapter 1 of Ralph Baergen's book (1995), Contemporary Epistemology.
Silmarien, let's not argue about this. This is just a little harmless mental exercise, only a discussion on a forum. In fact, I am not arguing in bad faith. As I have said, more than once, I am presenting an exercise; I was challenged by a Christian who said that Santa and God were not comparable, because there were good grounds to believe in God, while Santa was easily disproven. In response, I asked Christians to do just that: disprove Santa.Of course you're arguing in bad faith, unless you've dropped your insistence upon scientific evidence within the past couple of days and genuinely decided that you believe in Santa Claus.
Fine. If you don't want to engage with it, then don't.I've been viewing it as a hypothetical, though, in which case I would treat it the way I would any anti-intellectual position: by not engaging.
Interesting, but I'm afraid I'm not seeing the point. What do you mean? Are you suggesting that there is direct evidence that Santa is a created figure?It is not that difficult to distinguish between historical and fictional figures when there is direct evidence in either direction--for example, we know that Alan Turing existed and James Bond did not. There is documentation of the former, whereas it is the literary creation of the latter which is documented. Things don't get ambiguous until you look at mythological figures: did Gilgamesh exist? Did Moses?
On the contrary. I find it fascinating the way Christians, confronted by a comparison between a mythical figure they believe in and a mythical figure they don't, tie themselves in knots refusing to see the obvious similarities between them.There are interesting questions here, but the one you've chosen to focus upon isn't one of them.
That's fine. I wasn't expecting you to buy it since I was humoring you, and besides that, one wouldn't have to simply read his book since there's a whole bevy of sources our there in this big wide world by which to become better educated about epistemology. And don't just take it from me, you can put this to the test by finding your own sources on epistemology and see that what I'm saying is an empirical truism---but only of the 1st order.Sorry, back now. A busy day!
So, Philo, how do I read this chapter? Do you have a link to where it can be found online? Or can you post excerpts? I'm afraid I won't be buying the book, as I don't like having to pay to enjoy discussions on online forums.
No, that's not how this "works." I'm not skipping the rudimentary epistemological recognition that is set out not just by Baergen but by many others. I think it's important to say that I have to include his epistemological assessment even in my own approach to the Christian faith since there is no consensus on two (or three or four or five) sides of the epistemological divide. However, I'll do one thing better than all of that you ask, I'll start with Baergen and at the same time explain the general outline of my praxis for thinking about both Jesus and Santa.While I'm waiting to find out what Baergen said, perhaps we can move along. How would you present your epistemological justification for believing in Jesus? Perhaps that will give me some clues in how to put my case.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?