Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
The argument that justification is solely determined by factors internal to a person is nonsense. Justification depends on additional factors that are external to a person otherwise it is pure subjectivism...or possibly delusion.
No. Metaphysics, whilst valuable in that it can provide the glue to hold the scientific structure together (such as ensure its self-consistency, and help prevent errors of false inference), cannot arrive at new facts about nature. Only science has the methodology to do that.
And just so I can make sure you're honest, tell me what the methodologies of metaphysicians are according to metaphysicians working today. Not that you disagree with it! But what they are. I just want to see how much you've read on this. Physicists are typically clueless here. I don't blame them. They should just shut up and calculate. But they don't. They pontificate about matters outside they're expertise.
"Sticks and stones....."
Philosophy can be useful, as I said. See above.
I'm sure you can find many scholars that support your religious presuppositions.
Back to your subjective/delusional “epistemological internalism” I see.
I prefer substantiation for what I believe; you're free to believe any subjective nonsense you chose.
“Second or third-hand reports” amount to anecdotal evidence, which is insufficient information upon which to accept the alleged miraculous events of the Jesus story.
For the reason given directly above; even first-hand claims would be suspect given the improbable nature of the claims.
It is reasonable to assume that Paul seems totally unaware of the Jesus stories and teachings that ended up in the gospels...because he doesn’t mention them. He may have known of them, but we don’t know that he did.
And your argument is an argument from silence.
Comment