You're absolutely right Marvin, Thanks.
The argument from silence is not always an outright logical fallacy; it depends on whether it has been used inductively or deductively.
Tom
there is an ancient artist?s saying that states, "if you do not know your materials, all you do is express your inability to express yourself.
" an artist must know his materials and the ideal of a true artist is to know those materials so well that using them is as natural as breathing.
in the two companion articles, "rightly value your gift of life" and "be guided by the living god," the june 15th, 2004 issue of the watchtower proves beyond any doubt that its writers have attained that ideal with their chosen medium.
You're absolutely right Marvin, Thanks.
The argument from silence is not always an outright logical fallacy; it depends on whether it has been used inductively or deductively.
Tom
just got my mail order copy of crisis of conscience... got to chapter 2 in the first 20 mins!!!.
who else has read it, and what are your thoughts ???.
i've enjoyed it so far, and am glad to see how respectful ray franz was in his writing, with no 'outright attacks' on the wtbts.. bull!
Schnell's Thirty Years, gives a very unique glimpse into the Witness organization that you can't get anywhere else. Unlike Franz though, Schnell provides no documentation and is vitriolic in many places. This makes it much easier for practicing Witnesses to write off Thirty Years as garbage.
there is an ancient artist?s saying that states, "if you do not know your materials, all you do is express your inability to express yourself.
" an artist must know his materials and the ideal of a true artist is to know those materials so well that using them is as natural as breathing.
in the two companion articles, "rightly value your gift of life" and "be guided by the living god," the june 15th, 2004 issue of the watchtower proves beyond any doubt that its writers have attained that ideal with their chosen medium.
Errata:
Although Argumentum ad Ignorantiam and Argumentum ex Silentio are virtually identical in form, they are actually both specialized cases of other arguments.
The appeal to ignorance is a special case of the false dilemma having the following forms:
There is no evidence against X
Therefore X
OR:
There is no evidence for X
Therefore not-X
Obviously a claim's truth or falsity depends upon supporting or refuting evidence to the claim, not the lack of support for a contrary or contradictory claim. That lack of support is irrelevant.
Instead of drawing a strict true/false conclusion, the argument from silence is a special case of hasty generalization. In this form, the generalization is drawn not just from little evidence, but from no evidence at all. Both liberal and conservative Christians are fond of this argument for obvious reasons:
God didn?t state approval of X.
Therefore He disapproves of X.
OR:
God didn?t state disapproval of X
Therefore He approves of X
Ironically, to embrace either of these two arguments is to reject the other and therefore implicitly acknowledge the basic flaw in the approach.
Unlike the appeal to ignorance, there are scholarly uses for the argument from silence when it is legitimately constructed. In this form, source critics infer what a writer may have known or not known at the time of his writing. For example, in discussing Luke?s Bethsaida omission, Peaceful Pete and Leolaia, use the argument legitimately.
there is an ancient artist?s saying that states, "if you do not know your materials, all you do is express your inability to express yourself.
" an artist must know his materials and the ideal of a true artist is to know those materials so well that using them is as natural as breathing.
in the two companion articles, "rightly value your gift of life" and "be guided by the living god," the june 15th, 2004 issue of the watchtower proves beyond any doubt that its writers have attained that ideal with their chosen medium.
I have had quite a few conversations along these lines, some including the use of a first year logic (college) text book. I have learned that this kind of examination of JW writing is called nit-picking.
I've heard similar comments and not just from JW's. I've tried to get LDS missionaries to explain the Greek influence in the BOM for example. How could words like, "synagogue" or expressions like, amen amen lego hymin have found their way into it? This was "nit-picking" in their opinion.
Isn't it amazing that a JW can immediately grasp the problem and implication here, but will shrug off as "nit-picking" the fact that his own church tries to hide behind a transparent veil of obvious fallacies when it comes to a life and death issue?
i cannot compete with threads anymore.
they beat me!
threads about pit bulls and other dogs and virginity get all the attention.
Hey Farkel,
Believe me, I understand completely. Being married to an active JW like I am, my interest in these discussion boards pretty much revolves around what some here are calling "Phase I" also.
You've probably heard the old saying, "The simple lie overcomes the complex truth" many times. You and I both know that on many subjects, the JW faith capitalizes on this fact. Generally it takes about three paragraphs of explanation to untangle each line of bullshit. You have to weed out the irrelevancies, identify the real premisis behind the conclusion, and then explain both why the conclusion doesn't actually follow and how the false impression is given that it does.
Although there's a certain satisfaction in cleaning up this bullshit, it's a lot of work. Why take the trouble if people would much rather discuss their sexual secrets, American Idol and the color of their belly button lint? For me, the answer is simple: At this time and place it's probably not necessary.
Have you ever noticed that when some people exit from the JW's they accumulate large librarys? (Maybe not quite as large as Alan F's but still respectable.) Other people take the small handful of JW publications that they own and happily burn them. It reflects two very different ways the JW experience can be handled. Some people want a clinical understanding of the JW's. Other people never want to think of JW teachings again.
JW related disucssion boards seem to be populated with different proportions of these people. Although I personally enjoyed H2O it its heyday and I think you did too, JWD is different. Cleaning up JW bullshit is not for everyone and it's no surprise if many others want to get on with more interesting things. That can be a good or bad thing depending on how you look at it. Although JWD might attract more "fluffy" type posts, it's only fair to consider that the "serious" discussion groups attract far more crackpots, whackjobs, Bible-thumpers and self-appointed prophets. I'm sure YOU KNOW what I'm talking about.
JWD is composed of a terrific group of people with a huge cross-section of interests. There are dozens of partipants I can personally look forward to hearing from (and that includes you when you're here) without having to listen to too many clowns who are all suffering at an individual level from JW organization's main delusion. I'll take fluff over that anyday.
I hope you don't leave and if you do, I hope it's not permanent. Just think how much duller in would be for the WT monitors if you did.
All the best,
Tom
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usguns/story/0,2763,1239748,00.html
gun victim plans takeover revenge on manufacturer
dan glaister .
If that is true with all semi-automatic pistols then I might feel differently.
It's by no means true of all semi-automatic pistols. It only applies to slide and some action block safeties.
To take a more modern design for example: The manual safety Ruger 'P' series (e.g. p89, p90, p94, p944) incorporate as the primary safety, a "decocker" lever, which does four things:
(1) The firing pin is cammed forward into the slide so that the hammer cannot touch it.
(2) The firing pin is blocked.
(3) The hammer mechanism is disengaged from the trigger.
(4) The hammer is harmlessly dropped onto the slide. (Decocked)
However the slide is not blocked, so the magazine can be removed and the weapon taken out of battery with the decocker safety on. In fact, the Ruger 'P' series manual specifically states on page 10:
"The pistol can and should be loaded and unloaded with the safety engaged in it's "Safe" position, (Lever fully down, white dot and the letter 'S' exposed.) The safety should be in its "Safe" position at all times except when the user is deliberately positioned to fire at a selected target."
This makes the type of accidental discharge from unsafe handling which resulted in the Bryco/Jennings lawsuit virtually impossible.
while researching a reply to another thread, i discovered "the unbound bible": http://unbound.biola.edu/.
it allows you to search for a bible passage in several different translations, from king james to douay to original language hebrew and greek.
i am shocked, shocked i tell you, that the new world tranlation is not one of the options!
Mmmmmm....Because as the copyright holder, the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses / Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has steadfastly refused to allow the NWT to be used in this fashion?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usguns/story/0,2763,1239748,00.html
gun victim plans takeover revenge on manufacturer
dan glaister .
As an amateur gun smith, reloader and gun owner for many years my feelings are slightly mixed.
Maybe I'm just being a snob due to the fact that I regard Bryco/Jennings as garbage and don't consider their demise as any great loss
The article is not specifc about the mechanics of the accident. It sounds like it might possibly have been a slam-fire. (The sitter may have tried to clear the chamber by manually working the slide and had the slide slip from his/her grasp. If it happens at just the right point with this gun, the cartridge can be fed back into the chamber and the internal hammer can fall.) Regardless, the baby-sitter failed to keep the gun pointed in a safe direction which makes him/her 90% at fault here. Perhaps the weapon was never actually taken out of battery at all. This would render him/her 99.9999% at fault IMHO
However at the same time, firearm manufacturers certainly are aware of the legal and political climate in the U.S. and abroad. Bryco/Jennings was no exception. All reputable firearm manufacturers have gone to great lengths to idiot-proof their designs. Everyone in the industry knew why Ruger developed the New Model single action revolver and why Ruger to this day, will convert your Old Model for free. When it comes to autoloading pistols, Colt incorporated a 4th safety in the venerable 1911 design with the series 80. Glock pioneered the safe action system. Ruger and S&W developed decocking systems and DAO systems of their own.
Bryco/Jennings certainly knew that insulation from lawsuits through improved design was the trend in the industry and had been for many, many years. They chose to take their chances by marketing a technological through-back to the 1930's and it bit them.
without a doubt the most time-worn excuse of jw's when it comes to errors, omissions and failures of the jw parent organization goes something like this:i only ask that things be put in perspective and to also realize that the writers of the society are not inspired.. .
the statement above is certainly true.
the writers for the society certainly are not inspired.
Hi Leolaia,
To be fair, the association is not quite so blatant as to displace the Bible. I think even JW's would have objected to that. (But I wouldn't bet anything of value!)
Paragraph 2 in its entirety reads:
"Jesus pointed this out when he said: "Man must live, not on bread alone, but on every utterance coming forth through Jehovah?s mouth." (Matthew 4:4) The lower creations have no concept of eternity, but man does, as Ecclesiastes 3:11 says: "Even time indefinite he has put in their heart." Or as the Revised Standard Version renders it: "He has put eternity into man?s mind." Hence, man?s heartfelt desire is to live to time indefinite, even forever. Air, water, and bread alone are not enough for that. To live forever requires spiritual provisions based on "every utterance coming forth through Jehovah?s mouth." Today, they are found in one book, the Bible, and the supply is inexhaustible?all that you need, more than you can hold. This cupboard is never bare."
However the article does claim that WT publications are one of "Jehovah's spiritual provisions" just as food in the Garden of Eden and manna in the wilderness were. Predictably, it goes on to explain that just as "SOME" murmured and complained about those spiritual provisions in times past, "SOME" are not satisfied today ---blah blah blah....
.
without a doubt the most time-worn excuse of jw's when it comes to errors, omissions and failures of the jw parent organization goes something like this:i only ask that things be put in perspective and to also realize that the writers of the society are not inspired.. .
the statement above is certainly true.
the writers for the society certainly are not inspired.
Thanks Gadget
Another way one can make the implicit claim of inspiration is to state that God speaks through them.
One of the most striking examples of this ocurred in the July 1, 1943 issue of The Watchtower.