Re: [asa] Apologetics Conference

At 08:11 AM 11/17/2006, David Opderbeck wrote:

>"....It's a matter of consistency with other assertions, not a
>matter of proof. .." ~ David

@ Exactly. If p, then q p therefore, q

Until we add in personal bias / individual psychological make-up:

Hypothetical argument:

p = IF the world had a beginning, then q = God exists.
p = The world had a beginning.
q = Therefore, God exists.

(The antecedent of a hypothetical statement is the "if" clause and
the consequent is the "then" clause.)

The world contains individuals who are more strongly committed to the
falsity of the conclusion than they are to the truth of the antecedent.

In such cases, it isn't enough that these individuals accept the
logical connection between the antecedent and the consequent. Their
rejection of the conclusion will lead them also to reject the antecedent, ie:

If the world had a beginning, then God exists.
But God does not exist.
Therefore, it is false that the world had a beginning.

If you like going in circles, hop in the boat with these
one-armed-boat-rowers. :)

~ Janice

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 17 09:14:23 2006