Quote:
Originally Posted by sworkhard
What he's doing is classical human psychology. When we disagree with something or dislike it we ask if we must believe it. When we want to believe something and it's implausible, we merely ask if we can believe it. Every human does this to some extent. It a double standard worth fighting.
However, if T@T is consistent, i'm not sure that skepticism itself can withstand this level of skepticism.
|
Sorry, I don't exactly understand, are you suggesting that we should question everything? I agree: I am not asking anyone to believe anything. In fact, my claim is that such an incredible story deserves incredible evidence, and since there is no incredible evidence, it must not be a true story. We should not believe, we should question. It is certainly hard to prove something from so many years ago, but scientists do it all the time, or at least provide enough information that it is generally a reasonable thought that we have proven something.
Regarding the story of Jesus, whatever actually happened I believe is no where near the truth and all we have left is the legend. I am correct about the 'no where near the truth' part, I simply extend it to the entire story since the bulk of the story is fiction. My argument is not unreasonable.
We should (I believe) use a bit (a lot) of skepticism about everything.