Everyone is an inerrantist

Post Reply New Topic

http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2010/07/ev ... ntist.html

Well, now that's great. The real issue is whether this is true in any meaningful sense. I would have to argue that it isn't. Instead, I believe that this is an instance of philosophizing about the world as projection of internal characteristics. By that, I mean that few of the people accused of inerrantists actually are. Catholics are, but nobody else really is an inerrantist. The issue is that most people end up holding to a web of belief, and how webs of belief work is that each part of the web is revisable but everything relates to each other, and what this means is that while some parts of the web are harder to revise as they might be more central, technically anything can be revised. (There is no firm inner conviction in the truth of any one source) As such, to talk about others being inerrantists is ridiculous.

I dunno why I read this blog so much. It is ridiculous on many occasions, and really just shows that the authors have very sheltered minds.

What are your thoughts on this? (Note: I do recognize that earlier I might have been willing to affirm their point, but I've clearly changed a lot of views since then and removed a lot of philosophical influences)

The blog post is ridiculous. In my opinion, I mean, and I'm probably totally wrong!

This is mostly in support for the inerrancy of the Bible and it's funny how they think of those who support scientific consensus over, practically, creationism, as being inerrantist.

Science, by its nature, is errantist. The scientific protocols are such that any experimental observation indicating that a theory is wrong, leads to the theory being modified or discarded. Science advances on its errors, not its successes.

For example the quantum revolution in physics was brought about by Planck when he showed that equi-partition of energy over all frequencies (Raleigh-Jeans law) was wrong. Classical radiation theory died because it could not account for black body radiation.

The Michelson Morley experiment showed that aether as a substance with mechanical properties did not exist. The eventually lead to the the theory of relativity. The latest findings showing the acceleration of the expansion of the Cosmos will finish off General Relativity. And so it goes.

ruveyn

The article implies that any person or persons who have any manner of appoaching anything are inerrantist simply by virtue of having an approach, regardless of how dynamic they are.

I feel like I've been rhetorically rickrolled.