From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Tue Nov 02 2004 - 16:26:48 GMT
Sam,
> So I'm not sure I agree that we regular make "faithful" leaps to
> certainty, about anything.
Re: the EMTs, are they simply applying rules? I think I may have got
into this aspect of the discussion on the wrong premise. What are we
disagreeing about?
msh says:
LOL. I'm not sure. It all started with your example of a guy
wandering in from the desert, dehydrated. I beleive you via Witt
would claim that we don't perform any sort of empirical analysis in
this case, but simply believe that the guy is thirsty because he says
so. I would say that our observation of his condition IS an
empirical analyses. Furthermore, to quote myself from above, and with
my counterexamples in mind, I would say that I disagree that we
regularly make "faithful" leaps to certainty, about anything.
I don't know if this disagreement is important enough to spend a lot
more energy on. I'll let you decide.
sam re "factual" resurrection:
On the other hand, if I came to believe that (for example) the
resurrection was a put-up job by some of the disciples, designed to
manipulate the masses for some other purpose, such as preserving his
blood-line through a marriage to Mary Magdalene et cetera - then that
would completely undermine my faith as a Christian, and it would make
me unable to continue my life as a priest. So I would maintain that
there are factual elements in the faith which are essential, and
which cannot be compromised if something is to remain
'Christian' - as traditionally understood.
msh says:
Is there reliable historical evidence for such a scam? I don't know.
But let's say there was and that such evidence did undermine your
faith. Although what I know of you personally is limited to our
email exchanges, on and off-list, I'd be willing to bet that your
desire to participate in and make positive contributions to our
common humanity would continue unabated. The action itself, I think,
is what is admirable and important; not the banner beneath which the
action is carried out.
sam re msh's experience of Catholicism:
Well, one thing I would say is that what you describe is pre-Vatican
2. I don't know for certain, but I'm pretty sure that what you
received would not be taught today. It certainly isn't in (most of)
the Episcopalian tradition. Pre-Vatican 2 the RC did indeed teach
that science was wrong. But didn't the Pope apologise to Galileo etc
for all that?
msh says:
I don't know. I also don't know if things have changed to the point
where my sort of questioning would now be welcome. I suppose, even
then, if I had tried harder, I might have found some rogue priest who
might have been willing to lift the conversation to a different
level. Anyway, that was a long time ago...
Thanks for sharing some personal thoughts,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
-- InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983 Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is everything." -- Henri Poincare' MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archives: Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 02 2004 - 17:58:43 GMT