Evidence for God from Science

notes on fallibilism picked from web:

If everything is held open to criticism and possible rejection, then nothing is ever completely accepted.

As Plato shows in Meno, a student is not ready for instruction until he has recognized his own ignorance and has enough humility to make a genuine and contrite confession of ignorance. A student must beg for enlightenment. But begging for enlightenment, or seeking the Truth, is based on the assumption that enlightenment or Truth exists and and can be known. A student must have faith that there is something for him to discover, and that he is capable of discovering it. Also, a student must trust his teacher to help him. Finally, when truth is discovered, the student knows he has discovered it and makes a firm personal commitment to what he knows. Fallibilists are not at all humble, they are proud of knowing that they are ignorant, they have no faith that Truth can be known (if indeed it exists at all), they trust nobody, and they are unwilling to make firm commitments to beliefs. Fallibilists would make very bad students.

Truth is its own credential, and requires no proof to the knower. But knowledge is ineffable. The task of so-called "proof" (either justification or criticism) is to explain the unexplainable to someone eise. Obviously, proof must always fail to be complete. But it can help lead someone to the point where he can take a leap bevond the proof to understand Truth. Although proof technically fails, Truth exists and can be discovered. The existence of Truth and its discoverability give us hope for finding it, and we should commit ourselves to search for it.

If fallibilism succeeds in robbing us of hope that truth might yet be discovered and implemented, then all is lost. This is the great danger of modern times.

I almost believed in fallibilism, but I thought it might not be true.

RickD wrote:I almost believed in fallibilism, but I thought it might not be true.

Does anything else need to be said?

Beanybag wrote:

RickD wrote:I almost believed in fallibilism, but I thought it might not be true.

Does anything else need to be said?

Beany, it was a play on words. Falliblists don't believe in things because they're afraid those things may be found to be untrue.

RickD wrote:

Beanybag wrote:

RickD wrote:I almost believed in fallibilism, but I thought it might not be true.

Does anything else need to be said?

Beany, it was a play on words. Falliblists don't believe in things because they're afraid those things may be found to be untrue.

I know, I was praising your criticism. I think the position is semi self-refuting in exactly the way you described.

I received a gold medal for humility but when I wore it, it was revoked.

FL

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:I received a gold medal for humility but when I wore it, it was revoked.

FL

I'm stealing that one.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:I received a gold medal for humility but when I wore it, it was revoked.

FL

I'm stealing that one.

Daniel, you would have to steal it, since Australia doesn't earn many gold medals.

RickD wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:I received a gold medal for humility but when I wore it, it was revoked.

FL

I'm stealing that one.

Daniel, you would have to steal it, since Australia doesn't earn many gold medals.

Per capita we win more gold medals than the USA and most other countries, especially in the pool. Admittedly we have a bad Olympics this time round, but have excelled previous years.