Would you welcome a post on proving systems?

[KelseyR]

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four belief classes regarding what happens when we die.

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four viable proving systems by which we convince ourselves that we are in possession of the truth. In most instances these are tailored to promote internalized certitude- not truth. This is not always so.

The linking of specific belief classes to specific proving systems can also be perfectly reasoned. Each belief class adopts a system- whether or not they formally recognize it.

Only one proving system is conclusive by virtue of its concern for quality proof giving and multiple investigations; the other three being inconclusive. And the belief class using it has sole potential to discern the truth- which must also be said singular.

Would you welcome such a post, or do you prefer to remain unchallenged and probably off-track?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What evidences do you have for your position?

 

[Nakosis]

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four belief classes regarding what happens when we die.

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four viable proving systems by which we convince ourselves that we are in possession of the truth. In most instances these are tailored to promote internalized certitude- not truth. This is not always so.

The linking of specific belief classes to specific proving systems can also be perfectly reasoned. Each belief class adopts a system- whether or not they formally recognize it.

Only one proving system is conclusive by virtue of its concern for quality proof giving and multiple investigations; the other three being inconclusive. And the belief class using it has sole potential to discern the truth- which must also be said singular.

Would you welcome such a post, or do you prefer to remain unchallenged and probably off-track?

Sounds interesting so far. I question the idea of there only being four, but happy to consider it.

 

[KelseyR]

Sounds interesting so far. I question the idea of there only being four, but happy to consider it.

Belief classes or proving systems. To which do you refer?

 

[KelseyR]

What evidences do you have for your position?

Are you indicating genuine interest or intent to dispute?

 

[Nakosis]

Belief classes or proving systems. To which do you refer?

Ok, well belief classes first since I'm curious how you've divided this into four.
Proving systems is something I'd probably be more critical about however.

 

[dybmh]

Sounds interesting so far. I question the idea of there only being four, but happy to consider it.

+1, i think it would be interesting.

Belief classes or proving systems. To which do you refer?

I was drawn to the proving systems concept. I think it would be useful for me.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Are you indicating genuine interest or intent to dispute?

Genuine interest....with maybe "intent to reason".

Is that OK?

I am curious. Maybe I'll just follow your dialogue w/ @Nakosis ?

 

[Quintessence]

I'll welcome any such post provided it's in conformity with the forum rules. From your framing, I'm a bit concerned about the possibility treading into Rule 8 territory, so be mindful of that one. This is a place to discuss and debate ideas.

 

[Left Coast]

Would you welcome such a post, or do you prefer to remain unchallenged and probably off-track?

If you have a point to make, just make it, and support your claims with evidence. You don't need to wait for our welcome.

 

[joe1776]

My money's on the proving system which supports the belief that what happens after we die is a mystery without the possibility of solution.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four belief classes regarding what happens when we die.

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four viable proving systems by which we convince ourselves that we are in possession of the truth. In most instances these are tailored to promote internalized certitude- not truth. This is not always so.

The linking of specific belief classes to specific proving systems can also be perfectly reasoned. Each belief class adopts a system- whether or not they formally recognize it.

Only one proving system is conclusive by virtue of its concern for quality proof giving and multiple investigations; the other three being inconclusive. And the belief class using it has sole potential to discern the truth- which must also be said singular.

Would you welcome such a post, or do you prefer to remain unchallenged and probably off-track?

I am interested, but I have a few points and questions.

By now, you should be aware of the kinds of responses you are going to get. If you only want people to agree with you, then your intent is to teach and not to discuss and you are looking to seed your class with only those that will accept what you teach without question. Would you consider that correct? Do you consider that you have the truth and this is a place to spread your message or do you have something you wish to share and discuss? Presentation is sometimes everything.

Some of us will listen to what you have to say and I can wait to comment afterwards, leaving you the field to lay out your arguments. I have no idea where you are going with this. I am interested to see what you have. But I do want to kick the tires and take a look under the hood.

 

[PureX]

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four belief classes regarding what happens when we die.

It can be perfectly reasoned that there are exactly four viable proving systems by which we convince ourselves that we are in possession of the truth. In most instances these are tailored to promote internalized certitude- not truth. This is not always so.

The linking of specific belief classes to specific proving systems can also be perfectly reasoned. Each belief class adopts a system- whether or not they formally recognize it.

Only one proving system is conclusive by virtue of its concern for quality proof giving and multiple investigations; the other three being inconclusive. And the belief class using it has sole potential to discern the truth- which must also be said singular.

Would you welcome such a post, or do you prefer to remain unchallenged and probably off-track?

It's a very big subject, and one that most people are going to have great difficulty understanding, and accepting, I think. I would love to see a clear, simple exposition on the subject, but I suspect that is perhaps not possible, as the subject is just not that simple, nor intellectually obvious. But if you can write it, I will read it. And if I can understand it, I will gladly respond.

 

[KelseyR]

It's a very big subject, and one that most people are going to have great difficulty understanding, and accepting, I think. I would love to see a clear, simple exposition on the subject, but I suspect that is perhaps not possible, as the subject is just not that simple, nor intellectually obvious. But if you can write it, I will read it. And if I can understand it, I will gladly respond.

I appreciate your clear answer as to whether or not you would welcome this topic. You're right in that it is somewhat complex, but then again I'm a very good teacher. At this stage I'm just seeing how many might be in favor of learning something new. Then I have to approach the mods and see if it violates any rules. You see, this site (as well as a majority of beliefs) has vested interest in uncertainty, in inconclusiveness.

 

[dybmh]

I appreciate your clear answer as to whether or not you would welcome this topic. You're right in that it is somewhat complex, but then again I'm a very good teacher. At this stage I'm just seeing how many might be in favor of learning something new. Then I have to approach the mods and see if it violates any rules. You see, this site (as well as the majority of beliefs) has vested interest in uncertainty, in inconclusiveness.

Could be done via private message, multiple people can be invited...

 

[KelseyR]

I am interested, but I have a few points and questions.

By now, you should be aware of the kinds of responses you are going to get. If you only want people to agree with you, then your intent is to teach and not to discuss and you are looking to seed your class with only those that will accept what you teach without question. Would you consider that correct? Do you consider that you have the truth and this is a place to spread your message or do you have something you wish to share and discuss? Presentation is sometimes everything.

Some of us will listen to what you have to say and I can wait to comment afterwards, leaving you the field to lay out your arguments. I have no idea where you are going with this. I am interested to see what you have. But I do want to kick the tires and take a look under the hood.

At this stage I'm just seeing how much interest exists. Then I need to approach the mods. Yes, I'm convinced.

 

[KelseyR]

Could be done via private message, multiple people can be invited...

A good point.

 

[KelseyR]

My money's on the proving system which supports the belief that what happens after we die is a mystery without the possibility of solution.

You put no stock in reliable evidence and argument, in exhaustive investigation? That's your choice. Enjoy!

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

My personal opinion...

I think some of these subjects might be a great learning experience if a willing debater for the other side is found and the 1 on 1 Debate board, which exists, is used.

I almost feel like these more complex subjects get lost in the posts. Things move fast, and some of us are imperfect humans.

 

[KelseyR]

If you have a point to make, just make it, and support your claims with evidence. You don't need to wait for our welcome.

But I do, and you should be able to reason that. A topic of this nature must first have interest from the members- and then it must be put to the mods.