Comment on What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist? by Sean Pitman.
Inability or failure to falsify a hypothesis does not validate or constitute support for it.
If a hypothesis is tested in a potentially falsifiable manner, and it passes all tests thus far, it gains a corresponding degree of predictive value. If a hypothesis is not testable in such a manner, it cannot gain predictive value and therefore cannot be classified as a scientific hypothesis.
One could hypothesis that Ted Wilson is psychologically, spiritually, or physically incapable of robbing a bank, and the failure to show it actually happening (“in a reasonable amount of time”), or showing how it might happen, does not mean the hypothesis is valid or even scientific.
Actually, it does – given that Ted Wilson is put into various situations were he would have an opportunity to rob a bank while thinking he probably wouldn’t get caught (such as a bank with nobody inside and the vault doors wide open… etc.). If the hypothesis can be tested, and it passes the tests, it does in fact gain a degree of useful scientific predictive value.
What you seem to be talking about here is absolute proof. Well, as you should know, science isn’t about generating absolute proof. No scientific hypothesis or theory can be absolutely proven to be true – this side of eternity. Science is about taking what little information is currently available and extrapolating, based on that little bit of information, into the future.
One could also hypothesize that a three-day deceased human body can never come back to life, and the failure to show it actually happening (“in a reasonable amount of time”), or showing how it might happen, does not mean it actually cannot happen–as you wish to believe.
Again, you misunderstand science. The observation that dead bodies do not come back to life via any known naturalistic means is indeed very good scientific evidence, with a very very high degree of predictive value, that no dead body will ever come back to life throughout all eternity via such naturalistic mechanisms.
It is perfectly reasonable and rational, on the other hand, to expect that the Designer of Life could revitalize any dead thing – if evidence could be presented for the likely existence of such a God-like Designer.
If you think your “potentially falsifiable” hypothesis gives you a rational rather than faith-derived basis for your beliefs, then you can make that claim for essentially any of your beliefs.
The potential for falsifiability simply adds an element of rationality to faith. It doesn’t remove the need for taking a leap of faith – it simply gives a rational direction to the leap (compared to blind faith where the direction of the leap is entirely subjective). Again, science and a Biblical form of faith walk hand-in-hand as equals. One does not exist without the other.
Sean Pitman
www.Detectingdesign.com
Sean Pitman Also Commented
What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
I guess someone who accepts neo-Darwinism must have some problems with the reality of Biblical prophecy…
What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
You didn’t answer my question as to what you would do if you happened to have been in a place like Sandy Hook Elementary School when a shooter entered the building. Or, what you would do if someone threatened the lives of your own family. Also, don’t tell me that Australia has no police force or that the police there don’t carry guns…
What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
The Bible and Ellen White are very clear that Satan and his angels were forced to leave heaven just as Adam and Eve were forced to leave Eden after they fell to Satan’s charms. They are also very clear that the wicked will one day be excluded, by force, from the New Jerusalem and will, eventually, be completely destroyed from existence. I don’t think that’s how it worked with you and your family…
Recent Comments by Sean Pitman
After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!
The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…
The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…
Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.
Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).
Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.
