Dan’s explanation for why people do things that are not “good” is that people are merely imperfect. This seems to be Dan's myth that explains not “good” behavior. The problem starts with the obvious question, “Why are humans imperfect?”.
Dan seems to start from the point that all humans are born “perfect”, or at least born having not having done anything not “good” yet. Somehow from that beginning, imperfection magically shows up for every single person. So, you’d think that explaining this phenomenon would be beneficial in one’s quest to label this as “reality “.
As with the Materialist/Naturalist/Darwinian worldview, the biggest hole in the philosophy is at the beginning.
There are other holes in Dan’s myth, but without an explanation for the first and biggest hole, the rest don’t matter.
Where does the imperfection come from? We know that every effect must have a cause, so what is the cause of this imperfection?
At least, in the beginning, I am going to do something that I do not often do. But in this case, I Believe that it is very important to maintain focus. Given that desire for focus, I reserve the right to abort any comments that do not specifically relate to answering the questions asked, or explaining the whole in Dan’s myth. It should go, without saying, that I am looking for an answer that lives in the realm of the objective. It should also go without saying, that I am not looking for merely a regurgitation of some unproven claim that has been made previously. I apologize for this in advance, because my normal practice is to do little or no restriction of what people say. I sincerely hope that my request will be respected, so that I don’t have to abort any comments.
10 comments:
Mysterious. Magical, Imperfection, Myth.
The comment accidentally got aborted, but it deserved an answer even though it technically didn’t meet the criteria.
Took a quick look at a couple of the comments and so far it’s not looking good. But I’ll wait until I have more time before I decide on abortion.
So far none of Dan's comments meet the established criteria. However there are some sections that will likely be excerpted and addressed.
My initial read is lots of demands that I answer questions, at least one
I’m able to read more of Dan's in bits and pieces. What I’m finding is that the comments don’t seem to bear any relationship to the content of the post.
6 comments so far, and not one that seems to attempt any kind of rational answer.
The gist seems to be that humans are just imperfect just because Dan’s subjective perception leads him to believe that myth.
There furthers seems to be some nonsense about perfection and that this inherent imperfection is apparently the exception to the rule that every effect has a cause.
I’ll dig deeper when I have a chance and am not on my phone, but it seems clear that Dan can’t prove his claim based on what I’ve seen so far.
If one accepts that humans were created by YHWH, then was this alleged imperfection something that we were created with?
"Once again, I have NOT said that humans are born perfect. I've said just the opposite: That humans are NOT perfect, not even from birth. "
This response has two problems with it.
1. I literally put the word "perfect" in quotes in the line Dan has issue with to signal that I was not using the word perfect is a woodenly literal fashion.
2. I then clarified further about the position Dan has recently articulated.
When this is where Dan starts, you know the rest isn't going to improve since he clearly lacks comprehension or has just chosen to steamroll his narrative regardless of anything else.
"We're born as imperfect humans."
Which raises the question upon which this entire post is premised. Why, what caused this imperfection? A question which hasn't been answered so far. In all honesty, the problem of Dan's myth being virtually indistinguishable from the historic Christian doctrine of a sin nature still hangs out there unaddressed as well. So far it seems like mostly a semantic distinction without a difference.
This is all that remains of the third aborted comment.
A. So what? How does kicking the can down the road by saying that it's "not a perfect world" help you? The same question still exists, why is the world not perfect? What is the cause that precipitated the effect?
B. Simply repeating the same old thing multiple times in one bullet point.
C. There is no need for a "deeper dive" into anything other than you explaining with objective proof how your myth works. You putting words into my mouth, is not helpful at all.
D-F are just more examples of Dan's inability to follow directions and demonstrate some self control. That they are off topic, and irrelevant should go without saying.
One more comment aborted for failure to follow the guidelines.
"Why is it not an option to note: That's JUST the way it is? DOES everything have a cause?"
There is the Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Law of Causation that seem to be suggesting that your bizarre cop out is not an option here in the real world.
"If you want to consider natural causes,..."
I'm not limiting the cause of something outside of the natural world to natural causes, but if you want to make an argument that your MMIM is caused by "natural causes" then provide some objective evidence that these "natural causes" directly produce this "imperfection" that you've theorized about.
"This is a deep question and I'm glad you're asking it,..."
I suspect that this is obfuscatory language for something like "It's a deep question, and the very foundation of my MMIM, but I'm not actually going to answer it. Instead I'm going to ask a bunch of questions, many of which might be irrelevant, based on a false premise, or simply off topic and bitch when you don't answer them."
One more comment aborted.
My post, my blog, my questions. You do not get to decide what the appropriate starting questions are, or how things work here. Your job is to provide objective evidence proving that your MMIM is "reality" and explaining the genesis of the imperfection.
One more aborted.
Post a Comment