RE: [asa] A question on morals (OT and NT)

"The problem is that you are beginning with a wholly counterintuitive hypothesis. It would be like starting off "Let's assume that a unicorn can win the American League triple crown...." "

You gave a ridiculous example that no one would posit. If you think my statements and conclusions are false, then simply state which ones and why. That is standard practice in basic philosophy.

Usually the form is:

Given A, B, C; therefore D. You can question the givens, or if they are sound, question the conclusion as one that does not follow from the givens. But to summarily dismiss it all as foolishness is anti-intellectual.

...Bernie

________________________________
From: Pete Enns [mailto:peteenns@mac.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 5:10 AM
To: Dehler, Bernie
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] A question on morals (OT and NT)

Bernie,

The problem is that you are beginning with a wholly counterintuitive hypothesis. It would be like starting off "Let's assume that a unicorn can win the American League triple crown...." The response would be "huh?" I think some of us are saying "huh?" to you. The difference is that many of us were likely at some point where you are now theologically and have worked through it and see how poorly it accounts for things.... and that sounded much more condescending than I hoped it would....

Pete

On Nov 3, 2009, at 1:21 PM, Dehler, Bernie wrote:

Hi Pete-

"But, as I think others have already mentioned, you misstate and misconstrue the problem."

Maybe so. It is just a starting point, and it can get refined with input. Science works like that too: state a hypothesis, test, analyze results, then modify hypothesis accordingly. Sometimes the starting questions are silly... just to get started.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Nov 7 22:56:51 2009