This is a big enough deal that I'd like to give it its own post.
Information gets from the real world into our brains through the senses. We observe. Is there really any doubt about this?
For Christians, is the information about God simply beamed directly into your brain by God himself? If so, why is there a Bible that requires you to use your senses to read it?
Can we finally agree once and for all that we can obtain no information about the real world except through observation?
I'm transferring part of the response to another thread to this one:
ReplyDelete"I believe that using the senses *is* a valid way of transmitting information from the real world to my brain. I believe that because it is a logical conclusion based on what God has revealed in the Bible."
But before you get to even understanding the words, much less concluding that they're true, the fact that the words are on the page at all is empirically verifiable. How do you know that the book exists? How do you know there are symbols on the pages? How do you know the symbols you're seeing make up words that carry meaning at all? Because these things can be verified by anyone. This happens before you even get to interpreting meaning.
"What I am asking is why you believe it. How do you know it is valid? "
Exactly the same way you know that the symbols on the pages of the Bible are letters that make up words. Again, that process happens before you even get to what you say validates the Bible (that is, the meanings of the words).
So again, unless God is beaming information straight into your brain, you go through the exact same process of observation that I do. Can we agree on this once and for all?
The rest your comment would have been censored for repeating refuted claims, if I'd thought to read the whole thing before I approved it.
"Can we finally agree once and for all that we can obtain no information about the real world except through observation?"
ReplyDeleteI guess it depends on what you mean by "information", "real world", and "observation". If I correctly understand the sense in which you are using those words, then, no, I don't agree.
To answer your other questions, I can understand the Bible because God has created me with that ability (you too).
You wrote:
"So again, unless God is beaming information straight into your brain, you go through the exact same process of observation that I do. Can we agree on this once and for all?"
I already answered this:
"I believe that using the senses *is* a valid way of transmitting information from the real world to my brain. I believe that because it is a logical conclusion based on what God has revealed in the Bible."
You are confusing process with basis.
Okay then, define "process" and "basis" in the context you mean.
ReplyDeleteIn the context of what we are discussing, "process" refers to making observations to gain knowledge. I completely agree with you that we can gain knowledge by observation.
ReplyDelete"Basis" answers the question, "How do I know that making observations is a valid way to gain knowledge?"
My position is that God's existence is the basis for everything, including the validity of gaining knowledge by observation.
Let me give a specific example.
Scientists have observed things related to gravity. They have taken measurements, etc. and from what they have observed, they have established (or discovered) what we call "The Law of Gravity". The Law of Gravity is helpful, because it allows scientists to make predictions, plan things relating to The Law of Gravity, etc.
However, in my description, there was a conflating of "process" and "basis". The scientists making specific observations was "process", but did they ever observe "The Law of Gravity"? No, they merely observed the effects of The Law of Gravity in specific cases. So how do they know that The Law of Gravity applies in all cases? What is the "basis" for it being a "Law"? Not observation, because they have not (and cannot) observe every case. They must make an assumption, in this case, what is normally called "the uniformity of nature". That is, the assumption that the same laws of physics/chemistry/etc. apply everywhere and every time. The uniformity of nature is the "basis" for The Law of Gravity and other such scientific "Laws".
But that simply shifts the problem. How do we know that the uniformity of nature is true? What is the "basis" for the uniformity of nature? Not observation, since we can't examine every case. Perhaps you could come up with a basis for the uniformity of nature, but the same problem would persist. What is the basis for that?
The only answer is God. He is *the* basis for everything. He does not require a basis for His existence, because He is God. Part of His character is that He is self-existent and self-sufficient. He needs no explanation or anything outside of Himself.
This is what God said to Moses when he asked God how he should identify Him:
Exodus 3:14
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
What is the basis for God? You're only shifting the question as well. Quoting Bible verses in response does not answer the question, since you still have yet to establish that the Bible is a reliable source of information. If God doesn't require a basis, then why should the laws of nature?
ReplyDeleteMy position is this business about "basis" is one big red herring. The fact is that both our understanding of universe and the quality of our lives have been greatly enriched through the process of learning by observation. One cannot say the same about simply taking the teachings of some old book on faith.
DVD,
ReplyDeleteYou are still missing the point. You wrote:
"The fact is that both our understanding of universe and the quality of our lives have been greatly enriched through the process of learning by observation."
I completely agree, as I have already stated many times. I don't why you're bringing it up, since it proves my position as much as it proves yours.
You asked, "What is the basis for God?" I already answered that. God is the basis for Himself. He needs no other basis or cause.
Have you heard of the expression "turtles all the way down"? The story goes like this (from Wikipedia):
The most widely known version, which obviously is not the source (see below), appears in Stephen Hawking's 1988 book A Brief History of Time, which starts:
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
—Hawking, 1988
In case you missed it, your position is that of the little old lady. You are claiming to be the scientist, but your position has no foundation. It is simply assumption based on assumption based on assumption.
Your "basis" suffers from all of the same deficiencies you're accusing mine of. Since you reject mine, I reject yours. Refuted until you can provide better support. Moving on.
ReplyDeleteJust to be doubly clear on why I'm not tolerating this claim being repeated:
ReplyDeleteYou're essentially claim that your view of knowledge has a "basis" because you assume that there's a god, while mine does not because I don't. However, you are not able to support this idea with a shred of evidence. Since you cannot, I am now treating as refuted. When you can provide evidence to support your argument, I am willing to discuss it further. Until then, it's shut down.
Sorry, grammar fail... *You* essentially claim...
ReplyDeleteWhat evidence would convince you of the existence of God?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure, but since he knows everything, he knows exactly what would convince me.
DeleteI could brainstorm a few, I guess. How about Jesus descending from heaven during halftime of the Bulls game? How about making every portable electronic device in the world come on at the same time, whether they had power or not, and using them to deliver a personalized message to each individual simultaneously, revealing information that only that individual could know? Oooh, how about aliens landing on Earth that all turn out to be Christian? That'd be pretty compelling, don't you think?
I'm just spitballing here, but of course, I'm a mere human with limited creativity; God could really come up with a few rockers if he wanted, I'm sure.
Comment from Thoughts For Young Men censored for use of a term that he has refused to define.
ReplyDelete