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.
Define falseness operationally.Then ignore my analogy.
The point remains: Falseness is falseness.
Define falseness operationally.
Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.Something is false, when that something is not true.
E.g.
1 + 1 = 3 is a false statement. Which makes it a non-true statement.
-CryptoLUtheran
Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.
Is P1 true? Can you apply your definition of falseness to find out whether P1 is true or not?
When you say "falseness is falseness", that is a tautology. It has no operational semantics.
Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.I have no idea if it is true. The premise is unfalsifiable.
Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.
Are you saying that P1 is unfalsifiable?
That is not the definition of unfalsifiable.Of course it's unfalsifiable. There is insufficient data to say one way or the other.
That is not the definition of unfalsifiable.
Something is unfalsifiable when it can't be falsified.
There has to be a correct interpretation otherwise it couldn’t be a true story.There is no correct interpretation. We have to go back and study the original language. Only Jesus can add to what we receive from Moses. So we can always go back to see what Moses says about something.
The statement "aliens don't exist" is falsifiable.
I have no such plan.Alright, here's the hypothesis: There is life on other planets.
How do you plan on testing that hypothesis?
-CryptoLutheran
My point is this: That is a redundant tautology. It carries no operational meaning. It is useless in an argumentation.The point remains: Falseness is falseness.
There could very well be life on other planets. The issue has to do with how likely we are to interact with them. The natural laws remain consistent and the same anywhere we go. All the elements remain the same. So if life formed here is could just as easily form on another sun and another planet off somewhere.Alright, here's the hypothesis: There is life on other planets.
How do you plan on testing that hypothesis?
There are rules for interpretation that we learn in Bible School. Jesus tells us that we are to become like children and they have a more literal understanding of the Bible.There has to be a correct interpretation otherwise it couldn’t be a true story.
There is life on other planets. We can easily work this out using the size of the universe, amount of planets and stars. Our milky way galaxy alone contains around 100 billions planets. Out of these there are estimated to be around 300 millions habitable worlds in the universe. Basically it is impossible for Earth to be unique and contain life.Of course it's unfalsifiable. There is insufficient data to say one way or the other.
There may be life on other planets.
There may not be life on other planets.
What is the relevance of this to the present topic?
-CryptoLutheran
I don’t see how interpreting Exodus 20:11 figuratively is considered a literal interpretation. I do interpret Exodus 20:11 literally to mean that everything was created in 6 literal days.There are rules for interpretation that we learn in Bible School. Jesus tells us that we are to become like children and they have a more literal understanding of the Bible.
The different levels of interpretation include:I don’t see how interpreting Exodus 20:11 figuratively is considered a literal interpretation.
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?