Floods

Hipparchia said:
They seem coherent to me. timojin appears to be saying the following:
  • There was a major flood in the ME several millenia ago
  • The impact of this flood was so great that it was retained in oral memory and eventually written down
  • By that time it had acquired details and exagerations that obscured most of the facts, other than the central one that there was such a flood
  • Perhaps the flooding of the Gulf was what initiated this tale that then became a myth
I think he may also be saying that your questions reveal you already understand this and are just playing dumb, though I suppose there is an alternative explanation. :)
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me.

So in lieu of a definitive statement by timojin, we can take the position that timojin believes the biblical flood is a myth.
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
And the reason we can't get a definitive statement by timojin that forces us to make assumptions would be...
Click to expand...
I haven't made any assumptions. I simply read what timojin had written and made some reasonable inferences as to his views. I will be surprised if I got it wrong, although there might be a detail or two that is out.

In that regard, and referencing Origin's post. I can imagine that timojin might say he believes in the Biblical flood. That would not mean he thinks it had the characteristics of the flood described in the Bible, but that the flood that gave rise to the Biblical tales was a real one. (And it went on to acquire mythical elements in its retelling.)
 
Hipparchia said:
I haven't made any assumptions. I simply read what timojin had written and made some reasonable inferences as to his views. I will be surprised if I got it wrong, although there might be a detail or two that is out.

In that regard, and referencing Origin's post. I can imagine that timojin might say he believes in the Biblical flood. That would not mean he thinks it had the characteristics of the flood described in the Bible, but that the flood that gave rise to the Biblical tales was a real one. (And it went on to acquire mythical elements in its retelling.)
Click to expand...
You don't seem to know what "assumption" means given your post.
 
Hipparchia said:
That would not mean he thinks it had the characteristics of the flood described in the Bible, but that the flood that gave rise to the Biblical tales was a real one.
Click to expand...
I don't think anybody disputes that the Bible story is based on a real flood. I've seen a couple of real floods myself so I could write a story about one.

The question is whether the real flood was a one-time event like the Black Sea (or Persian Gulf) or whether it was an "ordinary" (more or less annual) flood that was embellished into the Bible story. Personally, I think it's unlikely that any hypothetical witnesses of such a one-time event were also authors of the Bible. It seems more likely that Noah's flood was made up out of a small flood.
 
Hipparchia said:
They seem coherent to me. timojin appears to be saying the following:
Click to expand...
That's if you assume he is making sense in his thinking somehow, and give every single one of his posts the benefit of that assumption - that there is a level of absurdity he would not post.
But he is a Fundamentalist Christian, and has posted accordingly many times. So that assumption is unwarranted.
Hipparchia said:
I think he may also be saying that your questions reveal you already understand this and are just playing dumb,
Click to expand...
Poe's Law applies.
Take the exchange in 72 and 73 - what assumptions must you make to impute sense and reason to Timojin? Do you assume, for example, that he accepts the existence then - in Biblical times - of a large spherical planet occupied by the oceans and continents familiar to us now? Because that assumption is not safe: you need explicit confirmation.
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
I would start your instruction by asking you to read post #83.
Click to expand...
If you want me to join you in this game you will specifically provide at least one example of an assumption you believe I have made.
I knew what post #83 said when I planned to write it.
I knew what post #83 said when I did write it.
I knew what post #83 said when I made my first response to you.
I do not need to revisit it until and unless you provide an example of what you believe to be an assumption.
Why would you assume differently?
 
iceaura said:
That's if you assume he is making sense in his thinking somehow,
Click to expand...
No. I do not have to assume it. I look at the written words - and yes I have "assumed" that he intended those words to appear, that they were not the chance outcome of random hits on the keyboard - and when I see structure and logic and intent in those words, I do not need to assume sense, I can simply observe it.

iceaura said:
and give every single one of his posts the benefit of that assumption
Click to expand...
I observe the same characteristics in each post and therefore infer the same significance. I have not knowingly read any of his posts on other threads, so I am unencumbered by "assumptions "based on prior observations.

iceaura said:
But he is a Fundamentalist Christian, and has posted accordingly many times. So that assumption is unwarranted.
Click to expand...
I do not currently know him to be a fundamentalist. Perhaps so. I have seen no evidence of it in his posts and therefore have not made any assumptions regarding his views in that respect.

iceaura said:
Take the exchange in 72 and 73 - what assumptions must you make to impute sense and reason to Timojin? Do you assume, for example, that he accepts the existence then - in Biblical times - of a large spherical planet occupied by the oceans and continents familiar to us now? Because that assumption is not safe: you need explicit confirmation.
Click to expand...
I have not made such an assumption as it was not relevant to the provisional conclusion I reached.

iceaura, you may perfectly well be correct in what you say. You, apparently, have experience with past threads involving timojin. I have not and have made no assumptions regarding those. Apart from the base level axioms, such as I am not a Brain-In-A-Vat, I have based my comments purely on what he has written. It made sense to me, it was presented logically. In order to have arrived at a different conclusion I would have had to make assumptions.

Tomorrow, as this thread develops, I may form an alternative provisional conclusion. Who knows, but I shall - as always - be working to minimise or eliminate any and all assumptions.
 
Hipparchia said:
No. I do not have to assume it. I look at the written words - and yes I have "assumed" that he intended those words to appear, that they were not the chance outcome of random hits on the keyboard - and when I see structure and logic and intent in those words, I do not need to assume sense, I can simply observe it.
Click to expand...
You can't see the "intent" you described, or an inherent logic in those posts, without assumptions such as I the one I mentioned - compare 72 and 73, for example.
Hipparchia said:
I have not made such an assumption as it was not relevant to the provisional conclusion I reached.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was. You are reading logic and intent into the posts - you are filling in certain gaps with sense and reason.
And of course nothing shows you wrong - the gaps are there, after all, not filled with contradictory material.

I merely wish to defend myself from the implicit accusation of unfairness or piling on - that poster is perfectly capable of believing that the world of "Sumeria" was covered with water, over the highest mountains, in a massive flood that did not affect the rest of the planet as we know it.
 
Hipparchia said:
If you want me to join you in this game you will specifically provide at least one example of an assumption you believe I have made.
I knew what post #83 said when I planned to write it.
I knew what post #83 said when I did write it.
I knew what post #83 said when I made my first response to you.
I do not need to revisit it until and unless you provide an example of what you believe to be an assumption.
Why would you assume differently?
Click to expand...
On the internet it is quite common for people to write posts they don't actually read.
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
On the internet it is quite common for people to write posts they don't actually read.
Click to expand...
It also seems to be common for some people to ignore repeated requests. Which assumptions do you believe I made? Either provide a specific answer or suffer the completely painless and irrelevant experience of being placed on Ignore.
 
Hipparchia said:
It also seems to be common for some people to ignore repeated requests. Which assumptions do you believe I made? Either provide a specific answer or suffer the completely painless and irrelevant experience of being placed on Ignore.
Click to expand...
I would praise Buddha if our conversations were to abruptly cease. Then I could go on talking about you after you stopped seeing my posts.
 
iceaura said:
You can't see the "intent" you described, or an inherent logic in those posts, without assumptions such as I the one I mentioned - compare 72 and 73, for example.
Click to expand...
I strongly suspect, though I stand ready to be corrected with logic or evidence, that I am reasonably well placed to determine what I can and cannot see. I see intent and inherent logic in timojin's posts. You tell me I can only see these if I assume he is making sense. But I made no such assumption. I read his posts and thought to myself - this chap seems to be making sense, seems to be writing logically, seems to be conveying a reasonably clear message. Given all these appearances and no contrary information what conclusion should I reach. Hmm. It rather seems as if . . . etc.

No assumptions were injured, or mistreated in the reaching of these provisional conclusions.
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
I would praise Buddha if our conversations were to abruptly cease. Then I could go on talking about you after you stopped seeing my posts.
Click to expand...
Go right ahead . You Karma will be greatly enhanced the more you talk about me. Young children will learn of your wisdom and discussions of your inadequate masculinity will fade from view.
 
Hipparchia said:
Go right ahead . You Karma will be greatly enhanced the more you talk about me. Young children will learn of your wisdom and discussions of your inadequate masculinity will fade from view.
Click to expand...
Those of us with short attention spans have already forgotten whatever point you may have been trying to make. If you want to end this little hissy-fit of a digression and get back to the topic, you'll probably have to make your point again.
 
sideshowbob said:
Those of us with short attention spans have already forgotten whatever point you may have been trying to make. If you want to end this little hissy-fit of a digression and get back to the topic, you'll probably have to make your point again.
Click to expand...
Then I'm pleased to remind you that the point was directly relevant to the thread - namely, from my perspective, timojin appears to be making valid points. (I have no interest in what he may, or may not have said in previous threads, or what his political, or religious views are. Such concerns could reasonably be thought of as a digression.)

Finally, if some member chooses to assert I making assumptions, then refuses to provide examples, I'll use whatever rhetoric I wish to highlight their behaviour. In contrast, iceaura has been polite and logical in his assertions regarding my alleged assumptions. We just happen to disagree.
 
Hipparchia said:
Finally, if some member chooses to assert I making assumptions, then refuses to provide examples, I'll use whatever rhetoric I wish to highlight their behaviour.
Click to expand...
Is the example below good enough?
Hipparchia said:
I simply read what timojin had written and made some reasonable inferences as to his views.
Click to expand...
Assumption is a synonym of inference.

So you can see why people would say you made an assumption.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top