You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #173: No, I am correct. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
laconicsax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-22-11 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #170
173. No, I am correct.
To begin, as darkstar3 pointed out, the "central claim" of the OP, isn't a claim, but a refutation of the claim that Exodus is true, Moses existed, etc.

In each of your three examples, rather than prove a negative, you are disproving a positive and wording it as a negative.

"Baltimore is not the capitol of the US" is a refutation of "Baltimore is the Capitol of the US," which is falsified by proving that Washington DC is the capitol. (Denying the consequent.)
"The Earth is not the center of the solar system" is a refutation of "the Earth is the center of the solar system," which is falsified by proving that the sun is the center.
"Cavemen and dinosaurs did not exist at the same time" is a refutation of "cavemen and dinosaurs existed at the same time," which is falsified by showing that dinosaurs died out millions of years prior to the emergence of humans.

In exactly the same way, "Moses did not exist"/"the Exodus narrative isn't true" is a refutation of "Moses existed"/"the Exodus narrative is true" which are completely unsupported. A wholly unsupported claim is proven to the same degree as a false claim--"Moses existed"/"the Exodus narrative is true" have been proven to the same extent as "Baltimore is the Capitol of the US."

How then might "the Exodus narrative is true" be proven? Well, one way would be to determine a consequence and affirm it.

If the Exodus narrative is true, there would be archeological evidence to support its claims.
There's no archaeological evidence to support its claims.
Therefore, the Exodus narrative is likely false.

You could even get more specific:
If the Israelites were in Egypt for generations, archaeological evidence confirming this would exist.
No such evidence exists.
Therefore, the Israelites weren't likely in Egypt for generations.

With each part of the Exodus narrative shown as unlikely, the likelihood of the entire thing being true diminishes. Moses' existence is a consequence of the story being true:

If the Exodus narrative is true, then Moses existed.
The narrative is probably untrue.
Therefore, Moses probably never existed.

The uncertainty associated with the conclusion is proportional to the uncertainty of the consequent and both are near impossible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC