[lbo-talk] Appeal to Ignorance

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

>[lbo-talk] Appeal to Ignorance
>Chris Doss lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com
>Sat Jun 18 09:07:55 PDT 2005
<snip>
>--- Autoplectic <autoplectic at gmail.com> wrote:
>NT being a form of skepticism and to the ears and readers who are 
>it's critics a form of chicanery. Ineffablism and the Deus 
>Absconditus maneuver ain't a theology, it's a cop out.
>---
>
>The end result of not accepting _some form_ of NT (broadly 
>understood as the acknowledgement that part of the universe may not 
>be knowable) is subjective or absolute idealism.

The idea that "part of the universe may not be knowable" in itself 
can't amount to any theology, negative or positive.  To get a 
theology out of it, we would have to follow syllogism like this:

1. God = unknowable.
2. Some part of the universe may not be knowable.
3. Since I believe that some part of the universe may not be 
knowable, I believe in God.

If we don't accept the major premise, we don't proceed from the minor 
premise to the conclusion.  Is there any reason why we should be 
compelled to accept the major premise?  None at all.
-- 
Yoshie

* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/>
* Monthly Review: <http://monthlyreview.org/>
* Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/>
* Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/>
* Calendars of Events in Columbus: 
<http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, 
<http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/>
* Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/>
* Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>
* Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio>
* Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>