Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Davros of Skaro

Did Jesus Exist Debate: Carrier VS MacDonald

503 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Mr Walker
10 hours ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

You seem to be confusing certainty with confidence.

If you're tentatively/almost certain, then you're uncertain.

You are either certain of being pregnant or uncertain of being pregnant.

What trimester are you in, Walker?

No confusion, and no need for the personal  commentary 

 States of Certainty and uncertainty are both continuum, not absolutes One can be highly certain or  completely certain or not very certain

I am fairly certain  you have used the word in these ways  

Its a state of surety or confidence 

and just ask any woman. Many y are   NOT  completely certain that the y are either pregnant or not pregnant  but have a degree of certainty 

There are many things one cannot be absolutely certain about, but have a high degree of certainty.

Many others we only have a small certainty about 

https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/intermediate-to-upper-intermediate/the-future-degrees-of-certainty

quote

Physicist Lawrence M. Krauss suggests that the need for identifying degrees of certainty is under-appreciated in various domains, including policy-making and the understanding of science. This is because different goals require different degrees of certainty—and politicians are not always aware of (or do not make it clear) how much certainty we are working with.[4]

Rudolf Carnap viewed certainty as a matter of degree ("degrees of certainty") which could be objectively measured, with degree one being certainty. Bayesian analysis derives degrees of certainty which are interpreted as a measure of subjective psychological belief.

Alternatively, one might use the legal degrees of certainty. These standards of evidence ascend as follows: no credible evidence, some credible evidence, a preponderance of evidence, clear and convincing evidence, beyond reasonable doubt, and beyond any shadow of a doubt (i.e. undoubtable—recognized as an impossible standard to meet—which serves only to terminate the list).

If knowledge requires absolute certainty, then knowledge is most likely impossible, as evidenced by the apparent fallibility of our beliefs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certainty#Degrees_of_certainty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Mr Walker
10 hours ago, eight bits said:

Careful speakers and writers use the word confidence, which does come in degrees or levels, and reserve certainty for a partiular level of confidence.

But fine, I'll just add certainty to that list of English words that mean one thing to you and something else to those around you.

They don't as a rule. The one particular Christian minister you googled up from obscurity did.

I like the name fine, however the topic concerns Jesus, and focuses on whether he existed.

If you say something about Jesus, then I will interpret it as being about a hypothetical person. If you say something about Christ, then I'll interpret that as being about an element of the Jewish religion.

Just when I thought that you might be getting the hang of this reading comprehension thing. Oh well, keep at it.

I don't require anybody to approach any academic question "impartially." What I like to see is high-quality reasoning about uncertainty despite personal biases. That usually begins with acquiring some understanding of what those biases are. As we've discussed, many in the guild are still working on that. Meh. Everything good takes longer than we'd prefer.

Well, that's a topic in itself, but the last one was shut down. So, maybe we just stick with the current topic.

This impresses you as typical academic discourse?

Why would anybody care what he eats, and how does his diet provide evidence concerning the historicity of Jesus?

First point? see my last post. 

Nup Indeed most of the Anglican ministers i have met in Australia preach the social gospel and many are quite open about not being a bible  literalist of either the old or new testaments.

many go so far as to believe that life after death does not exist but that Christianity provides a template to improve the world we live in.

  one example

https://davidould.net/rev-rod-bower-i-dont-believe-in-heaven-or-hell/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-30/what-drives-the-priest-behind-those-controversial-church-signs/10169188

Jesus IS Jesus Christ, just as i am not walker but Mr walker 

It is disrespectful and poor communication only to  use  his first name 

  Lots of Jesus's around Not many Jesus Christ's :) 

You interpret as you wish, but i know that you know what i am saying, and why i choose to use the whole name Thus it is you who is confusing our communication

well I do expect any academic from  any discipline to approach their work without bias ie impartially   Its how the y are trained to work 

Thats the only way to achieve the most accurate result, and thus the most useful result,  based on facts and statistics, not emotional responses or values 

Five years after making tha t offer no such accredited historian had been found 

I wonder if he had not used such colourful language if it would have gained so much traction, including many who sought to find an historian who denied the existence of christ and met those academic criteria.

  Again look at his credentials and academic experience to make a judgement on his expertise  

Or do you only allow atheists to make provocative statements to get attention and sell books  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
5 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Will, an opinion is a personal level or “for me” truth.

How do you line up your “for me” truth with universal truth? 

 

 

subjective truth vs objective truth

eg i really love my nectarines. I believe  they are the best nectarines available 

Both are personally true statements  but maynot be truths for others

Nectarines are a summer fruit 

I have several nectarine trees 

They are coming ripe at present 

These are more universal truths,  even those which apply to me 

ie its possible to prove each one of them to be true  even if, in other parts of the world, their nectarines are still dormant .

However the y may not be totally universal truths  Possibly in some places nectarines are not summer fruits  or a grown in climate controlled conditions 

So an absolute and universal truth is that,  "Nectarines are part of the fruit family" 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.