DogmaHunter
Code Monkey
- Jan 26, 2014
- 16,757
- 8,531
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
Upvote
0
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.
Alice gave a hypothesis and an explanation. She is also intellectually honest.
Intellectually, Alice is one step ahead of Bob.
To immediately rule out the possibility that there is anything which is unseen amounts to ignorance in action. That's Bob, according to this account we're discussing.
It IS an explanation to Bob's question.
Question to that explanation is something else outside the OP.
To have God or a god is certainly possible.
If it's an explanation, then the criteria for an explanation are so slack as to be useless. One can invoke an infinite variety of inexplicable invisible entities with inexplicable powers to 'explain' the observation, none of which give any more understanding of it than if they were not invoked.It IS an explanation to Bob's question.
Question to that explanation is something else outside the OP.
If you're referring to a 'traditional' tri-omni god concept (omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent), there are good arguments that such an entity is logically impossible, not least because those attributes are logically contradictory. One should not make Anselm's mistake of confusing the concept of a thing with the existence of that thing. Before asserting the certain possibility of a God or god, you need to establish what you mean by the term and why it is logically possible.To have God or a god is certainly possible.
On the contrary, Bob knows what he doesn't know.That's right. Bob is befuddled and can't contemplate any possible explanation, while Alice has already begun to assess the possibilities.
If it's an explanation, then the criteria for an explanation are so slack as to be useless. One can invoke an infinite variety of inexplicable invisible entities with inexplicable powers to 'explain' the observation, none of which give any more understanding of it than if they were not invoked.
If you're referring to a 'traditional' tri-omni god concept (omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent), there are good arguments that such an entity is logically impossible, not least because those attributes are logically contradictory. One should not make Anselm's mistake of confusing the concept of a thing with the existence of that thing. Before asserting the certain possibility of a God or god, you need to establish what you mean by the term and why it is logically possible.
On the contrary, Bob knows what he doesn't know.
'To know what you know and what you do not know, that is true knowledge.' Confucius
Without a description, God or a god is just an unidentified label - as I said previously. Alice may as well say a Boojum did it.Bob's question does not need a triune God as an answer. God, or a god, would be good enough. Logic is not needed yet.
That appears to be what Bob is doing; he says he doesn't understand how it occurs, then he says, "I wonder how he is doing it", implying that he is considering, or is about to consider, potential hypotheses. At this point, he is interrupted by Alice with her unsupported assertion of the inexplicable.That is not good enough. He needs a hypothesis to answer his unknown.
Whenever I say I don't know, I always have a hypothesis in mind, so I can explore if I want to.
Asserted is not the issue with Bob and Alice, certainly not with their immediate reactions to the water walking incident..What is asserted without evidence, can be dissmissed without evidence.
On the contrary, Bob knows what he doesn't know.
LOLAnd with that comment, it should be apparent to all that the thread has run its course and we should all go on to something else.
Well if that is how you see it. Then it is up to every man to prove for himselfThat appears to be what Bob is doing; he says he doesn't understand how it occurs, then he says, "I wonder how he is doing it", implying that he is considering, or is about to consider, potential hypotheses. At this point, he is interrupted by Alice with her unsupported assertion of the inexplicable.
"... a tentative conjecture explaining an observation, phenomenon or scientific problem that can be tested by further observation, investigation and/or experimentation."A hypothesis is a hypothesis
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?