1 Step at a Time

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

In a message dated 97-10-05 00:30:58 EDT, you write:

<< 
 >TILL
 >Okay, I'll respond to your other argument.  You compared the biblical
 >statements to someone who might say, "If you aren't part of the solution,
 >then you are part of the problem," but I too would consider this a logical
 >absurdity.  <snip>
 >
 >
 >ALWARD
 >More to the point, does it not convey well the attitudes and beliefs of the
 >speaker?
 >
 
 TILL
 Of course, it does, but my position is that the attitudes and beliefs of the
 speaker are logically absurd.  They are rooted in the either-or fallacy.
 
  >>
ALWARD

I agree that the logic of my hypothetical speaker is absurd.  Now, perhaps we
could return to the issue I wished to address, raised by you in an earlier
post:

You asserted that the statement in Matthew, "...the indifferent are against
Jesus" is a logical absurdity.  To repeat what I said earlier, it depends on
how one defines "indifferent".  As I said, a logical absurdity would exist
only if one defines "indifferent" to mean, among other things, "that which is
not against anything".  Do you agree that a logical absurdity would not
exist, if, for example, we took the speaker's definition of "indifferent" to
mean "that which unknowingly stands in my way"?  In fairness to you, I want
you to know that this is my last comment on this thread, since I don't really
think we are in deep disagreement. You may have the last word.

Joe Alward

Constructive comments about articles recently posted on my home page are
welcome:

http://members.aol.com/JAlw/joseph_alward.html
JAlw@aol.com

• Previous message: 1 Step at a Time
• Next message: Indifferent Contradiction (to Matt from Ben)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]