Date: 2004-04-11 10:04 pm (UTC)
I assumed that this was just a natural part of rhetoric and debate.
By qualifying your statements in this way, you're making them unfalsifiably, aren't you? In which case it's not possible to have a debate. Even within the bounds of philosophical discourse it becomes undiscussable. You said "a", I've given you "b". So far as I can understand you've come back as saying "yes, I did qualify that it was only largely a, which allows for instances of b. but it's still largely a."

I don't invalidate that your experience has been such, and that the generalisations fit those that you've come in contact with, but I disagree that they fit Christians as a whole. I do feel as if you're, perhaps unconciously, invalidating mine, though, based on your language. I feel as if the "extensive experience of discourse with Christians" bit was thrown in as if to imply that I've had less, and therefore don't know what I'm talking about. I'm not even attempting to correct you or your experience, as I don't necessarily feel that you're wrong (nor do I think that there IS a 'wrong') merely give you my own, which does not agree with yours, for consideration. But you've said you "honestly do not think so.", and so ends the conversation.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

sophiaserpentia: (Default)
sophiaserpentia

December 2021

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930 31 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 14th, 2025 12:29 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios