If all theological writing were by anonymous authors, would any have value?

[Boojatta]

Poll question: If all theological writing were by anonymous authors, would any have value?

Poll result (11 votes)
No. If it were all by anonymous authors, then it would all be of zero value.	(0 votes, 0%)	Vote
Maybe. Even if it were all by anonymous authors, then some of it might have value.	(0 votes, 0%)	Vote
Yes. Some of it does have value and the value doesn't depend on who wrote it.	(11 votes, 100%)	Vote

[Lerkfish]

1. if something expresses a profound truth, its irrelevant who said it.

many theological writings are unattributed already, as it turns out.

[Boojatta]

3. If it's anonymous, then doesn't that mean that we don't know whether or not

the author is a believer? It would be possible for a lot of theological writing to have been written by people who have or had a deep understanding of religion, but who never actually believed in any religion.

Then there could be a church that happens to use only theological writing by nonbelievers. In that case, would it matter whether or not the people who run the church are believers?

Consider Sunday school teachers. If the authors of all of the textbooks used by the teachers are nonbelievers, then does it matter whether or not the teachers are themselves nonbelievers?

[Lerkfish]

6. like I said, a profound truth stands on its own. Not really sure what you're

getting at, though, so I may be missing your point entirely.

[Boojatta]

8. This is an alternative starting-point that is intended to lead to

the conclusion of the following thread:
The essence of organized religion is lack of faith!

[Lerkfish]

10. oh, I guess I do better when people actually state what their intent is

when people try to set up threads in order to lead people into a predetermined conclusion, I don't fare as well.

I start responding to the maze intself and don't go down the directed path.

but hey, that's just me.

maybe you'll snare some others instead.

[Boojatta]

12. You did fine.

When you commit yourself to some particular assumptions, you are committing yourself to some particular conclusions. You can choose to pay no attention to some conclusions that you are committing yourself to, but you are nevertheless committing yourself to them.

Of course, it's possible to debate whether or not some particular assumptions actually imply some particular conclusions. One person can look for defects in some particular reasoning and another person can try to revise an argument to eliminate defects.

[Evoman]

17. How do you know wether or not something expresses a profound truth?

Do you accept something is as truth because it "feels" like the truth? What if the anonymous writer was me? I bet you I could write a bunch of stuff about god, light, energy and love, and about 50 percent of the people in here would believe I had something important to say....even though I was intentionally lying and trying to con you.

Boojata..TO ME, theological writing has no value whatsoever. All theology is is people writing down non-sense that they feel, without basing it in the real world. I have never found profound truth in any theoligcal writing, and I doubt I ever will.

[Zhade]

18. Asserting that something is truth does not, in fact, make it true.

It might be true; it might not be true.

[SteppingRazor]

2. Aren't they already anonymous?

No one knows who wrote the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, and most of their complementary works (some of the Talmud, the Psalms, etc.). So ... I guess I don't get the question.

[Boojatta]

4. Celebrities of religion (such as the Pope) don't just read out loud

old texts written by people who are now dead. They say things and write things.

[cosmik debris]

5. Begging the question

Theological writings have only the value given to them by the reader. They have no intrinsic value without the subjective evaluation of the reader. If the reader makes the conscience choice to put value in the author's identity, then it is the reader's choice.

To me, theological writings have no value regardless of who the author might be.

[Boojatta]

7. Raising the question

Theological writings have only the value given to them by the reader.

My intention was not to find out whether or not people know the one right answer, but to get information about what answer is right for each of a variety of DUers who have various subjective preferences.

To me, theological writings have no value regardless of who the author might be.

Good, you understood that I was talking about intrinsic value to you as an individual rather than, for example, resale value.

[Boojatta]

11. For clarity, I guess there should have been two different "No" options.

1. No. If it were all by anonymous authors, then it would all be of zero value. However, it would have zero value regardless of whether or not the authors were anonymous.

2. No. If it were all by anonymous authors, then it would all be of zero value. However, if we were not imagining that all the authors are anonymous, then we wouldn't be able to arrive at the conclusion that no theological writing would have value.

I take it that you would choose the first of these two.

[Lerkfish]

13. well, this overlooks that religious texts can have value other than

that accorded by the adherents of that religion. For example, there are historical contexts and sociological dynamics of texts.
And the aesthetic considerations. Psalms, for example, can be beautiful as lyrics whether you are judeochristian or not, for example.

[cosmik debris]

15. It is still the subjective value given by the reader

Even the social impact of theological writings depend on the individual members of that society agreeing on the value.

[Random_Australian]

16. I second that.

The Hallelujah Chorus is a great piece. My favourite.

[Orrex]

26. You're right, but....

Theological writings have only the value given to them by the reader. They have no intrinsic value without the subjective evaluation of the reader. If the reader makes the conscience choice to put value in the author's identity, then it is the reader's choice.

To me, theological writings have no value regardless of who the author might be.

That's true of all writing, and of art in general, wouldn't you agree?

If not, then why not?

[Boojatta]

28. Judgment of value

1. "Theological writings have only the value given to them by the reader."

2. "That's true of all writing."

Consider a book about how to build bridges. Suppose some bridges are built by people who studied from the book and most of those bridges collapse. If people investigate and discover that the builders correctly followed the instructions in the book, then various people might conclude that the book has little value.

[Orrex]

29. Well, all *literary* writing

Since the bible is hardly a technical manual, I figured that it would be clear that I was discussing literary writings.

[bryant69]

9. If reading something brings one closer to God

than it wouldn't matter who the author was. You can't counterfiet the spirit. If while reading something you feel a connection to something higher than yourself - well, than it's a good thing to read.

If, on the other hand, it doesn't make you feel closer to God, than the religious credentials behind the author wouldn't save it.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Evoman]

19. I asked this above....

What if the anonymous writer was me? What if I, to be evil, decided to write a bunch of stuff that I thought was absolute nonsense, but sounded good? What if I sounded "profound" and I "made you feel closer to god" but was snickering behind your back.

Would it still not matter who wrote it? Would it not matter that the anonymous writer wrote something just to snicker at your gullibility? Wouldn't it lose its value if you found out I wrote it?

[bryant69]

20. Why would you want to do that?

What would be the benefit?

But at any rate, in theory at least, you should be able to tell, because the spirit of your hypocricy would shine through, if I were in tune with the spirit. In practice, though, humans are falliable, and, particularly if it was something I wanted to hear anyway, I might well accept it until I found out the truth.

Bryant

[Evoman]

23. My point is simply that you SHOULD care who wrote something

and that you do. Anybody can pretend they know the truth...theologians, psychics, con artists. And the only real difference between the theologian and the con-artist is that the con-artist doesn't believe his own bullshit.

[bryant69]

24. Ah - that's the only difference you say?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Orrex]

30. Without knowing who wrote it, how would one make the distinction?

If your anonymous writing expresses what is perceived, by some, as a profound truth, then how would that differ from identical writings attributed to some famously transcendent genius?

No difference at all. Judgments about the author of the work are separate from the work.

[damntexdem]

14. The poll question and categories are meaningless.

It depends on the situation. Just because we have names attached to old copies of old alleged documents, does that give them greater value than were the names absent? But the lack of a name of an author of a recent document can prevent checking on the author's background and other writings.

True, the value of a document, and of an argument, can be vetted absent the author(s)'s name(s) -- in fact, that is preferred for peer review. However, following review, an author is expected to stand behind, and take responsibility for, what was said.

[Dorian Gray]

21. As I am reading the novel now

and it deals with religion to a great extent, I would like to ask the question: Would the Brother's Karamazov be less worth reading if written by anonymous? Would the work mean less if someone who didn't struggle with religion himself wrote it? Does Dostoyevsky's background enhance the reading experience? Or is it a great work of literature standing on it's own?

I personally think that a little of both is the answer. Works can stand on their own, definitely, but the author's experience is, undoubtably, where the work is born out of. Since nobody experiences the same life as anybody else, I don't think that anybody would be truly capable of writing a sincere work on the discussion of theological matters unless they were writing what through their own experiences. (Whether the work would uphold current theological beliefs, whether Christian, Judaic, Buddhist, or Pagan... or whether the work would disprove the ability to prove God's existance.)

[trotsky]

22. Hard to say.

If there were some kind of requirement about it, you'd certainly cut back on the charlatans and hucksters who publish books of "profound wisdom" and who manage to eke out quite the comfortable luxury life sharing supernatural nuggets with the unwashed masses.

[cosmik debris]

25. I found a good example

"Spirituality is all and it lives in immediacy."

Does this statement have any value? If you knew who said it would it be more or less valuable?

[Orrex]

27. It sounds like a fortune cookie

But I may not be a good one to provide an answer, since "spirituality" doesn't have much meaning to me.

In any case, the value of this statement does not vary given the identity of the speaker.

[cosmik debris]

31. And yet it got 9 votes for the Greatest Page! n/t

[Orrex]

32. But is that relevant?

Did it get those 9 votes because of who said it?

And, if so, does the identity of the speaker give it more value? How so?

[cosmik debris]

33. I'm sorry

I can't answer most of those questions. I suppose that my point was that being on DU gives it more credibility to some than it would have if found in a fortune cookie. That is, you can say bogus mumbo jumbo in an intellectual form and it gets more respect that it would if you said it in a Chinese restaurant.

But that is a generalization that has all the flaws of generalization in general.

[Orrex]

34. Actually, I think that you've hit on an important point

The fact that one forum's mumbo-jumbo is another forum's wisdom just shows that context is important in interpretation, but that the underlying work itself (and the value thereof) doesn't change. For example, to someone who doesn't believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the New Testament is of little value as a source of Messianic wisdom. The work is the same in both cases, but in diffent contexts the value varies greatly.

[cosmik debris]

35. You stated that point better than I did. Thank you n/t

[Orrex]

36. Thanks--I love this kind of discussion

I also made a small edit to that post to clarify something re: the New Testament, but the main point is unaltered.

[cosmik debris]

37. We have changed Boojatta's original point

from authorship to context. But I believe that they are related. The writings of the New Testament would be inconsequential without their context, but also inconsequential without attribution to a Deity and his entourage.

Remember Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land? It was a beautiful allegory of the Christ story, but it has no religious value because it was not written by an apostle.