Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 08-21-2009, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

If you like I'll cut it and paste it just for your benefit. It's a thread I started analyzing 1 Cor 11 and the institution of the eucharist here, but if you can't press the link, perhaps it's not a matter of digital inability.

If it's truth you're looking for, you should be in a religion. That's what usually deals with truth and there's lots there. I'd prefer to stick with eking out a little more understanding. If you want truths from me, forget it.

doesn't understanding require truth? or do you not care if you have an accurate understanding?

Understanding requires insight into reality. Truth is a weasel word.

spin
(For truth, justice, and the American way.)

sschlichter · 08-21-2009, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

doesn't understanding require truth? or do you not care if you have an accurate understanding?

Understanding requires insight into reality. Truth is a weasel word.

spin
(For truth, justice, and the American way.)

do you think associating the word reality with the meaning of the truth will eliminate weasels?

spin · 08-21-2009, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Understanding requires insight into reality. Truth is a weasel word.

spin
(For truth, justice, and the American way.)

do you think associating the word reality with the meaning of the truth will eliminate weasels?

Hard to say. People have the tendency to drift in word usage. I've complained bitterly on this forum over the sloppy use of the word "myth". People acknowledge the issue and drift back to sloppy statements about myths.

Why not just use the word "reality" or "the way things are/were" and avoid any confusion on my, or your, part?

spin

sschlichter · 08-21-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

do you think associating the word reality with the meaning of the truth will eliminate weasels?

Hard to say. People have the tendency to drift in word usage. I've complained bitterly on this forum over the sloppy use of the word "myth". People acknowledge the issue and drift back to sloppy statements about myths.

Why not just use the word "reality" or "the way things are/were" and avoid any confusion on my, or your, part?

spin

ok, if I slip and use the word truth then replace it with "understanding based on reality"

spin · 08-21-2009, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Hard to say. People have the tendency to drift in word usage. I've complained bitterly on this forum over the sloppy use of the word "myth". People acknowledge the issue and drift back to sloppy statements about myths.

Why not just use the word "reality" or "the way things are/were" and avoid any confusion on my, or your, part?

ok, if I slip and use the word truth then replace it with "understanding based on reality"

Hmm, I mustn't have been clear enough. :redface: As the word "truth" inherently has extra baggage one will always have doubt as to the way you are using it and you will be liable to spreading its usage beyond your resolve into that extra baggage. Think for example of the differences in implication of "big heart" and "large heart", when ostensibly the two adjectives are close synonyms. "Big" has a lot of extra baggage.

Truth really isn't a term for general scholarly discussion, despite its popularity in logic. But if you must use it, I'll try to assume you mean something else.

spin

Steven Avery · 08-21-2009, 10:44 AM

Hi Folks,

I simply point out that redaction theories are convenience without substance. And give some cases where even where there are variants the interpolation/redaction/omission theories can be all over the map, matching presups. (Heavenly witnesses is the most fascinating, John 1:18 should qualify, one where there is more consistency in argumentation .. high Christology vs low .. is 1 Timothy 3:16 ... ending of Mark and Pericope have their own dynamics.) Putting together the spin response into one pastiche, one beautiful tapestry.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

I'm waiting for a hint of perception from you. It's been a long unfullfilling experience. We know what you will say and why. Denial because of your prior commitments and they have nothing to do with attempting to discover how things really were. True. But as evidence is not a field in which you've ever ploughed, I can't expect you'll have much knowledge of it except secondhand filtered through others' acceptable apologetics. Hmmm, plausibility. Also important in a good novel. So, not only shoot at your target but also your audience. You'll be the last fellow standing, talking to no-one. You need to build a relationship with your audience, if you are interested in communication, rather than alienate them. There is a real world out there. You might want to investigate beyond the monastic walls. This begs the purpose of why Steven Avery is here at a freethought forum insulting whoever he is talking to. What people do here he claims is posing, game playing, based on ignorance. What grounds does he offer for his judgments? spin

Nope.. nice, a little kvetch, a little politics for my bumperoo, and nothing there on point.

Wait ! Hold the phones. spin agreed with my main point.

"actually when it comes to theories of interpolation, folks can come up with pretty much whatever theory they please"

spin - "True"

Thanks, spin. We agree.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

sschlichter · 08-21-2009, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

ok, if I slip and use the word truth then replace it with "understanding based on reality"

Hmm, I mustn't have been clear enough. :redface: As the word "truth" inherently has extra baggage one will always have doubt as to the way you are using it and you will be liable to spreading its usage beyond your resolve into that extra baggage. Think for example of the differences in implication of "big heart" and "large heart", when ostensibly the two adjectives are close synonyms. "Big" has a lot of extra baggage.

Truth really isn't a term for general scholarly discussion, despite its popularity in logic. But if you must use it, I'll try to assume you mean something else.

spin

yes, I understand but I am too old to remember (and not praticluarly motivated) not to use the word truth when referring to something I understand to be reality. You can attach whatever baggage you like to it.

spin · 08-21-2009, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

I simply point out that redaction theories are convenience without substance.

Pointing things out the way you do is merely unprocessed cheese. No real substance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

And give some cases where even where there are variants the theories can be all over the map, matching presups. (Heavenly witnesses is the most fascinating.) Putting together the spin response into one pastiche, one beautiful tapestry.

Stop waffling, will you? You're supposed to try to sound like you have something to say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

I'm waiting for a hint of perception from you. It's been a long unfullfilling experience. We know what you will say and why. Denial because of your prior commitments and they have nothing to do with attempting to discover how things really were. True. But as evidence is not a field in which you've ever ploughed, I can't expect you'll have much knowledge of it except secondhand filtered through others' acceptable apologetics. Hmmm, plausibility. Also important in a good novel. So, not only shoot at your target but also your audience. You'll be the last fellow standing, talking to no-one. You need to build a relationship with your audience, if you are interested in communication, rather than alienate them. There is a real world out there. You might want to investigate beyond the monastic walls. This begs the purpose of why Steven Avery is here at a freethought forum insulting whoever he is talking to. What people do here he claims is posing, game playing, based on ignorance. What grounds does he offer for his judgments? spin

Nope.. nice, a little kvetch, a little politics for my bumperoo, and nothing there on point.

We've gotta stop these waltzes.

spin

Steven Avery · 08-21-2009, 10:59 AM

Hi Folks,

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Pointing things out the way you do is merely unprocessed cheese. No real substance.Stop waffling will you? You're supposed to try to sound like you have something to say.We've gotta stop these waltzes. spin

Yeah, go get some soy cheese and quinoa waffles at Waltzbaum.

Shalom,
Steven

Now if I talk of the substance of repentance and faith and the resurrection of Jesus more, the need to turn from transgression to holiness, Hebrews 6 and other sharing, will that warm up the reception ?

spin · 08-21-2009, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Pointing things out the way you do is merely unprocessed cheese. No real substance.Stop waffling will you? You're supposed to try to sound like you have something to say.We've gotta stop these waltzes. spin

Yeah, go get some soy cheese and quinoa waffles at Waltzbaum.

Shalom,
Steven

Now if I talk of the substance of repentance and faith and the resurrection of Jesus more, the need to turn from transgression to holiness, Hebrews 6 and other sharing, will that warm up the reception ?

Perhaps you need a priest. This schlock you're serving up has little to do with BC&H.

spin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.