Originally posted by LemonJello I'm not asking about the bible. But out of passing interest, what would it mean for the bible (or any written account for that matter) to be infallible? That each and every proposition contained therein is true?
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles Whatever you mean by it is irrelevant to my criticisms about your idea that there is a knowledge-dependent relation between arguments and tautologies.
It's interesting how, in the same sentence, you admit that you don't know what I mean and yet claim to know what my idea was and declare it wrong.
It's also interesting how you changed this imaginary argument of mine from this:
the truth values of an argument's propositions [...] yield a tautology.
to the weaker version:
there is a knowledge-dependent relation between arguments and tautologies
I have to say that, at least, you're getting closer.
Originally posted by Palynka It's interesting how, in the same sentence, you admit that you don't know what I mean and yet claim to know what my idea was and declare it wrong.
I don't need to know what you mean by it in order to know that it's wrong. Much in the same way that a tautology's referents need not be known in order to identify it as a tautology. It's quite elegant.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles I don't need to know what you mean by it in order to know that it's wrong. Much in the same way that a tautology's referents need not be known in order to identify it as a tautology. It's quite elegant.
Since it is the verb, hence the operator, then you do need to know what it means.
Originally posted by Palynka If you're interested in knowing what I mean, give me an example of a non-tautological argument and I'll illustrate you what I meant.
Some priests are child molesters.
A priest lives in my neighborhood.
Hence, a child molester lives in my neighborhood.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles Some priests are child molesters.
A priest lives in my neighborhood.
Hence, a child molester lives in my neighborhood.
Originally posted by Palynka A non-fallacious one.
I'm not going on a wild goose chase. This is the first time you've restricted your claim to valid arguments. Just tell me what characterizes a non-tautological argument.
The fact that you haven't even bothered to comment on LJ's topic is revealing. Your issue is with me.
His question is not addressed to me. My issue is with you, because you are attempting to perpetuate confused logical notions, which I cannot in good conscience allow.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles His question is not addressed to me. My issue is with you, because you are attempting to perpetuate confused logical notions, which I cannot in good conscience allow.
LemonJello, to which my post was addressed, had no problem understanding what I meant.
It's not my fault you still haven't understood what I meant and refuse to let me illustrate it.
Edit - On the other hand, this is pointless. The people who I care to discuss with understood what I meant. You clearly haven't and are unwilling to try to. Ta-ta. I just hope this ridiculous tango hasn't killed the thread.
Originally posted by Palynka LemonJello, to which my post was addressed, had no problem understanding what I meant.
LemonJello is much more gracious than I am, which is why I'm a BWA soldier and he's not. He was probably just leaving the dirty work to me. I'd be surprised if he didn't endorse my objections to your claim.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles I'd be surprised if he didn't endorse my objections to your claim.
Read his post. He says I would be right, had the definition of infallibility been the one I was alluding to (which had been hinted in his opening posts).
I would have agreed with you, if I had said what you claim me to have said. Fact is, I didn't.
Originally posted by whodey Do you consider love to be infallible? Put another way, is there a better way to interact with those around you? It seems to me that if yoiu walk in love with others around you, this would be an ideal state or infallible state. In such a world sin is nonexistent, therefore, it is considered to be "perfect".
Do you consider love to be infallible? Put another way, is there a better way to interact with those around you?
I would share your appraisal of meeting the world and others with love and compassion, and I would generally agree that it is the "best" we can do in our dealings. I don't think I would use "infallible" to describe any of this, but I would argue that the cultivation of virtuous action-guiding dispositions and aspects of character is conducive to our living and interacting well.
Not entirely sure how any of this is really relevant to the initial topic of the thread.
24 Jul '08 15:011 edit
Infallibility?
Back to Top