General Discussion

Apologetics and Theology

Read 3416 times

ParaclitosLogos

  • ***
  • 4902 Posts
    • View Profile
H.H. uncertainty principle
« on: August 31, 2015, 11:19:45 am »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

And, I am wondering what is the principle or principles behind it.

Perhaps, something like:

If professional peers disagree on a given topic, then, the only reasonable thing is to not believe either side.

if So, does that work? what consequences it implies?

If not, what is it? and, how does it work? what is its motivation ? from which principles it follows?
what are the consequences of it?
« Last Edit: August 31, 2015, 11:36:40 am by ontologicalme »

1

Redsox_239

  • **
  • 735 Posts
    • View Profile
    • http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/choose-your-own-topic/shroud-turin-blood-body-and-wounds-christ-6032120.0.html
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2015, 11:35:08 am »
Thats just completely silly
Shroud of Turin: Blood, Body, and Wounds of the Christ

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/choose-your-own-topic/shroud-turin-blood-body-and-wounds-christ-6032120.0.html

2

ParaclitosLogos

  • ***
  • 4902 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2015, 11:39:35 am »
Thats just completely silly

Can you elaborate?

3

Redsox_239

  • **
  • 735 Posts
    • View Profile
    • http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/choose-your-own-topic/shroud-turin-blood-body-and-wounds-christ-6032120.0.html
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2015, 11:47:08 am »
Just because say Richard Swinburne and some other christians reject the moral argument and some non-christians do as well doesn't mean it follows that you should deconvert or believe by faith that is just absurd. Some people disagreeing doesn't mean the argument doesn't work. In any argument there are supporters, and then detractors who don't think it is effective. I'm pretty sure the same thing can be turned around to atheist and you could say "Since there are some Atheistic arguments that are rejected by some Atheist, and non-atheist you should leave Atheism or just believe it by faith". Its just again a silly illogical thing to say.
Shroud of Turin: Blood, Body, and Wounds of the Christ

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/choose-your-own-topic/shroud-turin-blood-body-and-wounds-christ-6032120.0.html

4

Harvey

  • *****
  • 26588 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2015, 11:48:48 am »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

This seems to be a kind of political skepticism expanding into all areas of intellectual thought -- including theology and Christian belief. The problem is that it's true that persons A, B, C, D, E may fail to convince each other, but this doesn't mean that every single one of them are not convincing to us. We are justified to favor a view of any particular individual even if we are not qualified (due to a lack of scholarly or scientific training, etc.) to argue against the other views. That justification comes from the same justification that allows us to hold any particular view over another. There are certain holistic elements to a view which do not require that we become experts in that argument.

So, for example, there's a holistic element to agreeing that the universe must have had a beginning. True, we may not be able to respond to the expert testimony of a philosopher or mathematician who challenges our rejection of a past infinite, but we are justified in clinging to the view of an expert who is able to challenge that view as long as there are such experts and that our holism is not obviously irrational. Such as, we wouldn't be justified in believing the universe created itself (no matter if there were experts who believed such crazy notions) since the holism itself doesn't make sense.

5

H.H.

  • ***
  • 2173 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2015, 12:18:20 pm »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

And, I am wondering what is the principle or principles behind it.

If a significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt then that doubt should be taken as reasonable. If there is a reasonable doubt then doxastic commitment is irrational.
some dive into the sea, some toil upon the stone

6

Language-Gamer

  • ****
  • 7815 Posts
  • I sneezed on the beet and Dwight got mad.
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2015, 12:22:07 pm »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

And, I am wondering what is the principle or principles behind it.

If a significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt then that doubt should be taken as reasonable. If there is a reasonable doubt then doxastic commitment is irrational.

By that principle, doxastic commitment to your own principle is irrational as a "significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt about it" (and, more than that, the significant portion believes it's wrong!).
I told her all about how we been livin' a lie
And that they love to see us all go to prison or die
Like, "Baby, look at how they show us on the TV screen"
But all she ever want me to do is unzip her jeans

7

H.H.

  • ***
  • 2173 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2015, 12:30:40 pm »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

This seems to be a kind of political skepticism expanding into all areas of intellectual thought

It's not political, it's rational honesty and realistic humility. "lean not on your own understanding"

Quote
So, for example, there's a holistic element to agreeing that the universe must have had a beginning. True, we may not be able to respond to the expert testimony of a philosopher or mathematician who challenges our rejection of a past infinite, but we are justified in clinging to the view of an expert who is able to challenge that view as long as there are such experts and that our holism is not obviously irrational.

Man that is just not how reasonable people go about forming their beliefs. If you're just going with the expert that is confirming your presuppositions or intuitions or whatever then you're not being fair or honest .

Quote
Such as, we wouldn't be justified in believing the universe created itself (no matter if there were experts who believed such crazy notions) since the holism itself doesn't make sense.

We wouldn't be justified in believing that, but we also wouldn't be justified in completely ruling it out. If it's an opinion that's given serious credence by other experts and hasn't been entirely ruled out then we have to at least make room for it.
some dive into the sea, some toil upon the stone

8

H.H.

  • ***
  • 2173 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2015, 12:32:04 pm »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

And, I am wondering what is the principle or principles behind it.

If a significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt then that doubt should be taken as reasonable. If there is a reasonable doubt then doxastic commitment is irrational.

By that principle, doxastic commitment to your own principle is irrational as a "significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt about it" (and, more than that, the significant portion believes it's wrong!).

That's assuming I have a commitment in some other direction! Doubt is not belief, it's the absence of.
some dive into the sea, some toil upon the stone

9

Language-Gamer

  • ****
  • 7815 Posts
  • I sneezed on the beet and Dwight got mad.
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #9 on: August 31, 2015, 12:37:21 pm »
H.H. offered an interesting opinion in another thread:
.... And since there are many within the faith as well as those outside of it that don't find those arguments convincing, the only honest approach is either fideism or deconversion.

And, I am wondering what is the principle or principles behind it.

If a significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt then that doubt should be taken as reasonable. If there is a reasonable doubt then doxastic commitment is irrational.

By that principle, doxastic commitment to your own principle is irrational as a "significant proportion of intelligent, informed rational people are in honest doubt about it" (and, more than that, the significant portion believes it's wrong!).

That's assuming I have a commitment in some other direction! Doubt is not belief, it's the absence of.

Idk what you mean. Either you are committed to your principle or not: if so, then it undermines itself; if not, then using it to guide your evaluation of certain commitments is irrational.
I told her all about how we been livin' a lie
And that they love to see us all go to prison or die
Like, "Baby, look at how they show us on the TV screen"
But all she ever want me to do is unzip her jeans

10

H.H.

  • ***
  • 2173 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2015, 12:44:59 pm »
Idk what you mean. Either you are committed to your principle or not: if so, then it undermines itself; if not, then using it to guide your evaluation of certain commitments is irrational.

Even if I doubt the principle I still wouldn't be justified in committing to its converse. If I doubt the principle then my skepticism simply deepens, it doesn't clear up the controversy.
some dive into the sea, some toil upon the stone

11

Language-Gamer

  • ****
  • 7815 Posts
  • I sneezed on the beet and Dwight got mad.
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2015, 12:46:58 pm »
Idk what you mean. Either you are committed to your principle or not: if so, then it undermines itself; if not, then using it to guide your evaluation of certain commitments is irrational.

Even if I doubt the principle I still wouldn't be justified in committing to its converse. If I doubt the principle then my skepticism simply deepens, it doesn't clear up the controversy.

Well since it is self-refuting then that's good reason to think it's false. So there you go, justified in committing to its converse.
I told her all about how we been livin' a lie
And that they love to see us all go to prison or die
Like, "Baby, look at how they show us on the TV screen"
But all she ever want me to do is unzip her jeans

12

Harvey

  • *****
  • 26588 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2015, 12:49:05 pm »
Man that is just not how reasonable people go about forming their beliefs. If you're just going with the expert that is confirming your presuppositions or intuitions or whatever then you're not being fair or honest .

Of course we are captains of our own ships, HH. The experts we tend to agree with are those who see the world our way. Now, in the course of understanding the particulars of our holist beliefs we might change our views due to expert testimony. For example, originally I was skeptical about evolutionary biology, but I agreed in the holist principle that life might be conforming to some type of order. When I later saw the evidence for evolution I immediately became quite convinced that Darwin's theory of natural selection was true. However, that didn't stop me from believing that there's more to the story of evolution than that. However, I did quickly come to believe that life evolved and that natural mechanism is a key mechanism for that to have happened. My views swayed within the holist principle I held. In addition, some holist principles conflict, and over due course one might be swayed to downplay one holist principle in order to uphold what they see as more of a strategic one.

13

H.H.

  • ***
  • 2173 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2015, 12:49:43 pm »
Idk what you mean. Either you are committed to your principle or not: if so, then it undermines itself; if not, then using it to guide your evaluation of certain commitments is irrational.

Even if I doubt the principle I still wouldn't be justified in committing to its converse. If I doubt the principle then my skepticism simply deepens, it doesn't clear up the controversy.

Well since it is self-refuting then that's good reason to think it's false. So there you go, justified in committing to its converse.

It's not self refuting, it's just uncertain.
some dive into the sea, some toil upon the stone

14

H.H.

  • ***
  • 2173 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: H.H. uncertainty principle
« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2015, 12:52:50 pm »
Man that is just not how reasonable people go about forming their beliefs. If you're just going with the expert that is confirming your presuppositions or intuitions or whatever then you're not being fair or honest .

Of course we are captains of our own ships, HH. The experts we tend to agree with are those who see the world our way.

I agree that's true for many people, but that doesn't justify it.  We are captains of our own ships but unfortunately a lot of us are just bad captains.
some dive into the sea, some toil upon the stone