To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 7902
7901  |  7903
Subject: 
Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:45:54 GMT
Viewed: 
1154 times
  
For closure, in order to make the historical record complete.

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:

<snip> a very long and point by point "refutation"

Jon, you missed the point. The real question here, which you didn't address,
is "is this parody of a religion and the premises it's based upon different
in *degree* or in *kind* than christianity"

You attacked the tenets, evidence presented, etc. in detail (and quite
effectively too), but failed to grasp that deeper meaning. Sorry if it
wasn't clear.

You also failed to grasp, or decided to reject as inconvenient, that the
same mechanisms you employed are employed by those that argue against
christianity.

My claim, and the entire point of the exercise, is to show that Lehmanism
(and the evidence, logical analysis, claims to faith, etc, introduced to
support it) differs from christianity (and the evidence, logical analysis,
claims to faith, etc, introduced to support it) only in *degree*.

Both require that one accept certain kinds of evidence to validate claims of
miracles, both require the use of "non logical reasoning", etc.

Is christianity *more* valid than Lehmanism? *Yes*, because it has more
adherents, a longer history, more testimony, etc. etc... but *No*, because
it differs only in degree, not in kind. Both require the same thought
processes to accept or reject, and both could be true, or false, and both
have as much, or little, hope of verifiable effect on people. We have no
better tools to evaluate one than we do the other, we just have more
material to look at in one case than the other.

Debating the truth or falseness of Lehmanism, which some take to be patently
false, is just as ludicrous as debating the truth or falseness of
christianity, which some also take to be patently false, with as little or
as much basis for so doing.

++Lar



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
 
(...) I doubt that the discussion will ever truly end, although the thread certainly will.... Thank-you for the perspective that you provided, as I suspect that although you only present it in illustrative form, that it actually provides a framework (...) (24 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
 
(There's a lot here and it would make sense to split up further replies into separate threads depending on the topics below - just a thought) (...) How do you define "saved"? Don't abuse religious language without providing a context for your (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

231 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR