<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Quite a long post. I don’t have the
time to answer all of these issues, but I did find a few things of note where I
think Mr. Fox misconstrues the Christian belief of ransom/imputation.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'>“I
see giving demanded, slavish love to some alleged god(s) who is/are so weak
that it/she/he/they cannot operate and judge objectively without that
"love as a ransom payment" as a pathetic, sick, (and grossly
insulting to a powerful, beneficent god, if one exists) belief.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>First, the love I have for God is a
sincere response to His mercy towards me. There is nothing “slavish”
about it. I am a willing servant. Secondly, the issue is not whether God can or
“cannot operate and judge” without a ransom. He most certainly can,
though I praise Him that He does not. The Christian belief concerning this has
nothing to do with any limitation on God’s part. It has to do with His <i><span
style='font-style:italic'>love/mercy.</span></i> This is what “God is
Love” means. He had every right to give up on the human race for their
sinfulness, but He sent His Son to suffer on the behalf of His covenant
children.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>This may be difficult to grasp these days
because the idea of covenants is all but lost. There is a little of it left
though. For instance, if one of my sons broke one of Mr. Fox’s windows,
he would think nothing of demanding payment from <i><span style='font-style:
italic'>me</span></i> – and rightly so. Although <i><span
style='font-style:italic'>I</span></i> didn’t break the window, I still willingly
bear the responsibility because I love my son and do not want Him to be at the
mercy (or lack thereof) of Mr. Fox.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Lastly, I, being on the receiving end of
God’s mercy, think He has made His message very clear. I recognize that this
is subjective, but the “Getting to Heaven for Dummies” book as Mr.
Fox stated, is called the Gospels. They are very straightforward. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Repent from your sin (this requires your acknowledgement
that you have sin in the first place).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'>Luke
13:3<o:p></o:p></span></font></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'>"I
tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Believe that Christ’s obedience
trumps your disobedience.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'>John
3:16<o:p></o:p></span></font></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'>"For
God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes
in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>This is the simple message of the gospel.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-style:italic'>Mark
9:24 "I do believe; help my unbelief."<o:p></o:p></span></font></i></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
vision2020-bounces@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Art Deco<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Monday, January 10, 2005
3:01 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> Vision 2020<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [Vision2020] Gary
Larson on one of today's headlines</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Melynda, Ron,</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Even statements like:</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"The square root of blue recrystalizes sodomy."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>can have emotional meaning and appear to have cognitive meaning
and other kinds of meaning, if people use them often enough.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>To answer directly your question and request for an example:
common examples used daily like the one above, where people claim the
statements are true, but can find no way to demonstrate their truth (or
clearly explain their meaning without contradicting themselves and having
to invoke the concept "mysteries"):</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"God is love."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"Christ is God."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>However, the truth of statements like:</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"My house is located in Idaho."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"Leather soles do not last forever."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"The probably aren't any unicorns in Laird Park."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"There exist many different infinite Abelian
groups."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>are testable.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>So are almost all the claims in elementary physics books, for
example. We are successfully able to send persons to and
retrieve them from the moon, find tumors with CAT scans, and establish
property boundaries in Latah County by depending on the </span></font><strong><b><font
size=5 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:18.0pt'>truth</span></font></b></strong><font
size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'> of these statements. Therefore,
those who are of the opinion of that the </span></font><strong><b><font
size=5 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:18.0pt'>truth</span></font></b></strong><font
size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'> of certain kinds of
statements are not testable by repeated observations are living in a
fantasy world.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Whatever the meaning of any statement, except for esthetic/emotive
purposes, if the statement cannot be understood in such a way that its truth,
falsity, or probability can determined and applied, then 'tis folly to rely
upon it,' whatever it means, however comforting/reassuring it is, or whatever
fantasies it helps to fulfill. While you and I may share a set of ethical
values, I do not need the unverifiable alleged approval/instruction of some
alleged god(s) or other superstitious beings/forces to persuade me to act in
ways I deem ethical. Of course I have and do make ethical mistakes, but I
try to find them and to correct them by observation, education, and
reconsideration.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=5 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:18.0pt'>Further</span></font></b></strong><font size=4><span
style='font-size:13.5pt'>, another test for the truth or falsity of a group of
statements is logical consistency. If a group of statements contain a
contradiction (a falsity), then until I see an example of a true contradiction,
I will continue to disbelieve/reject such combinations of statements.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>I repeat</span></font><strong><b><font size=5 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:18.0pt'> </span></font></b></strong><strong><b><font size=6
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:24.0pt'>the dilemma for the
thoughtful believer</span></font></b></strong><font size=4><span
style='font-size:13.5pt'>: If our conduct and the attainment of an
orgasmic eternal life is so important, if some alleged god(s) really love
us and therefore want us to achieve/earn this alleged eternal life, then why
the hell are the rules of achievement so fraught with contradictions,
confusions, disagreements, disclarities, hatred/war generating elements, etc.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Why is determining truth of the rules for behaving as some
alleged god(s) desire toward our fellow creatures and thus attaining eternal
bliss not as easy as determining the rules for building a bridge or
successfully worming a dog (both of such actions would seem to be much less
important than a attaining blissful eternal life), if some powerful,
omnibenevolent god(s) are in charge? You would expect this/these very
powerful, beneficent god(s) would be able to write or cause to be written
a clear <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Getting to Heaven for Dummies</font></i></em>
manual, instead of the raft of alleged, confusing, contradictory, fantastic,
war/hatred generating holy books claiming to have <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">the truth</font></i></em> various people now believe.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>From an earlier post:</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Ron Smith says:</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>"I say Christ is God. You say He is not. Christ being God is the
cornerstone of my faith. By you saying He is not God, you are saying my faith
is wrong. Don’t feel bad about it. We can’t all be right. That
would be silly."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Unintentionally perhaps, Ron has pointed to something that might be of
significance to many of us:</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>In Ron's faith and many other faiths, the only way to some alleged
ecstatic, eternal life is by believing and affirming certain statements as true.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>My guess is that for many of the religious, an ecstatic, eternal life
is the main event, allegedly infinitely paling anything and everything that
occurs here on earth. </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Isn't it a bit perplexing that an alleged omnipowerful, omnibeneficient
God would present such difficult, confusing, yea contradictory instructions for
achieving/earning such a coveted goal. Wouldn't the hypothesis that this
alleged God is either indifferent or diabolically sadistic be more consistent
with the evidence at hand?</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=5 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:18.0pt'>Even a periodic, straightforward, unequivocal,
unmistakable demonstration of her/his/its existence/wishes/intentions would
certainly be a more effective way to market its/his/her program.</span></font></b></strong><font
size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'> Instead we are left with a welter
of confusing (the Virgin Mary allegedly appears on a grilled cheese sandwich),
contradictory, indecipherable, intransigent, hate and war
generating claims with not only rancorous disagreement, but worse yet,
without no method, so far discoverable, to find the truth. Again, this
seems to support the hypotheses of either [1] an alleged god(s) of vastly
different properties than those proclaimed by his/her/its earthly followers or
[2] no god(s) at all.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>I am sorry my blunt statements offends you, because I believe that
you and many other believers are thoughtful, ethical persons, but in the spirit
of the citation from <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Mark</font></i></em>
previously given: for me, good works are very important.
Conversely, I see giving demanded, slavish love to some alleged god(s) who
is/are so weak that it/she/he/they cannot operate and judge objectively without
that "love as a ransom payment" as a pathetic, sick, (and
grossly insulting to a powerful, beneficent god, if one exists)
belief.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>There whole thing sounds like a story made up by an
ineffective/incompetent parent who can not earn love/respect but seeks to
coerce it by lies, fairy tales, and brutal threats.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Wayne</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>----- Original Message ----- </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>From: "Melynda Huskey" <</span></font><a
href="mailto:mghuskey@msn.com"><font size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>mghuskey@msn.com</span></font></a><font
size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>To: <</span></font><a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><font
size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>Vision2020@moscow.com</span></font></a><font
size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 11:35 AM</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Gary Larson on one of today's headlines</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>> In pursuance of Moffett's First Axiom, I'll wade in here (but I
promise to <br>
> keep it reasonably brief!).<br>
> <br>
> Wayne writes:<br>
> <br>
> "When searching for "the truth" it may be useful to
understand that some <br>
> statements are neither true nor false. For example:<br>
> <br>
> " 'The square root of blue recrystalizes sodomy.' "<br>
> <br>
> "Just because words can be strung together in an apparently
syntactically <br>
> correct sentence doesn't mean the sentence has a comprehensible, literal, <br>
> testable meaning."<br>
> <br>
> This example demonstrates an interesting property of language: it
can be <br>
> used to construct syntactically correct nonsense statements--thus allowing
<br>
> us to derive rules of syntax for individual languages, and even, <br>
> potentially, basic principles about language itself.<br>
> <br>
> Wayne goes on to say,<br>
> <br>
> "In your quest for "the truth" you might watch out for
these kind of <br>
> assertions. Religion, philosophy, politics, etc. are rife with such <br>
> statements. These assertions are generally recognizable by the
practical <br>
> impossibility of being neither unequivocally confirmable nor falsifiable or
<br>
> for the establishment of any significant probability of thier truth.
The <br>
> latter two cases is often especially the case."<br>
> <br>
> But here I believe you're drawing a false conclusion, Wayne. There
is a <br>
> categorical difference between syntactically flawless nonsense sentences, <br>
> which by their nature are not intended to contain meaning for speakers,
and <br>
> sentences which do not contain literal or testable meanings, but which
have <br>
> some contingent and deferred meaning for speakers. Your implication,
of <br>
> course, is that such statements as "In the beginning was the
Word" are <br>
> simply nonsense, on a par with your "square root of blue," while
other <br>
> statements are verifiably true--say, "You just can't prove the
existence of <br>
> God."<br>
> <br>
> As a student of post-modern French linguistics and theory, I have to smile
<br>
> at the notion that any language at all is literal or testable. There
is a <br>
> certain naivete in the belief that some words are more literal than
others. <br>
> The free play of the signifier means that all meaning is contingent, <br>
> endlessly dependent on a chain of connotations without any ultimate <br>
> referents outside the system of language. What seems quite
demonstrably a <br>
> fact contained in a literally true sentence to you is itself as subject to
<br>
> slippage, incoherence, and misprision as any prophetic utterance by
Habbakuk <br>
> or Nahum.<br>
> <br>
> Secondarily, it seems to me quite dangerous to assert that language must
be <br>
> subject to tests of literality in order to be comprehensible. Since
there <br>
> is no meaningful connection between a signifier and a signified, what can <br>
> literality mean? Inherent in the notion of literal, testable,
language is <br>
> the premise that some kinds of experience are more "real" than
others, and <br>
> that you or I can determine the reality of another person's experience by <br>
> comparing it to our own. I find both of these ideas nearly
impossible to <br>
> defend, owing to the circularity of the proof, "I experienced it,
therefore <br>
> it is real."<br>
> <br>
> Hurrah for Derrida!<br>
> <br>
> Melynda Huskey<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> _____________________________________________________<br>
> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br>
>
</span></font><a href="http://www.fsr.net"><font size=4><span style='font-size:
13.5pt'>http://www.fsr.net</span></font></a><font size=4><span
style='font-size:13.5pt'>
<br>
> </span></font><a
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><font size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</span></font></a><br>
<font size=4><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>>
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ<br>
> <br>
></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>