An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Dr Exiled »

Gadianton wrote:
Sun Nov 15, 2020 7:52 pm
Dr Exiled wrote:
Sun Nov 15, 2020 7:20 pm
...perhaps that even though there is this literature against eye witnesses, with God all things are possible. God can certainly make his holy witnesses remember whatever is prudent, so have faith, blah, blah, blah.
I can't say that in the future he won't argue this, but it's not the direction he's going here. What he's arguing today is that there is a respectable literature against eye witnesses, but when you look into it, none of it applies to the Three Witnesses, and so they are home free. More on particulars when I respond to Doctor Cam. He isn't saying their bad memories are understandable and God helped with the good parts, he's saying there is no reason to doubt their memories, such as in the case of other witness scenarios.

The Proprietor of the discussion board I linked to is heavily influenced by Josh McDowell and Christian authors who defend their religious beliefs by turning founding events into fictional courtroom dramas. The Proprietor is now taking it to the extreme, by roping in career lawyers and judges to legitimize these fictional scenarios. If I were a Mormon legal professional, I would be very careful about taking calls from Mopologists.
I guess I was playing off of what his covid-19 expert, Sam LeFevre, said in the comments section:
The human mind, by itself is frail and forgetful. “What we remember, as well as remembering itself, requires help” (Neal A Maxwell). We have help to remember all things. John 14:26. And that came to my rescue again this past week. I suspect the witnesses also had some help.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
User avatar
malkie
God
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by malkie »

Well, of course the "factors [that] can reduce the accuracy of eyewitness identifications" are "not applicable" in the case of the 11 witnesses. They are totally irrelevant - and were possibly chosen for that reason.

The square hole factors are laughably not applicable because they apply to a witness to a crime who is asked to identify a possible perpetrator. The 11 round peg witnesses were people who claimed to have had a voluntary (and, in some cases, sought after) experience of viewing an object. For example:
  • there's no lineup where the witnesses are asked to pick out, from a set of similar objects, the gold plates that they claim to have seen
  • there's no suspect to identify
  • there's no possible racial disparity between the witness and the gold plates
  • there's no crime scene at which the witnesses might have felt stress
  • the gold plates do not have characteristics such as tattoos or extreme height
Imagine, however, if the witnesses could be tested on relevant factors from their experience, for example:
  • their ability to distinguish gold from other substances
  • their ability to read and interpret/translate the characters on the plates
At best, they were witnesses to something that could possibly have been a set of gold plates, but could not eliminate other possibilities. In addition, they were hearsay witnesses to the contents of the plates, having been told what the engravings on the plates were translated into. (not sure if this fits the legal definition)
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5283
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Philo Sofee »

Color me skeptical, Peterson is merely familiarizing himself with a few pages of a few books in order to make it appear he is objective and well read. He has done this since he read Shakespeare at age 4, graduated to Hawthorne and Twain at age 5 and Milton at age 6, all the while mastering Arabic, Hebrew, English, and Nibley by age 7, not to mention Emerson, the Book of Mormon, D&C, Bible, Koran, and the Bhagavad Gita all before he got baptized by age 8.
We have a self-Genius well read in that anything he writes, any name he names, means he is in the know. This is a man to listen to! His breadth and depth of intellect is second to none (sorry Donald, you been scooped dude), who has read everything you ever have, plus more, (and all this before he was 10 years old) and therefore, his very specialized cherry picking will be ignored and missed by 90% of his LDS audience, and in line with the Brethren's conclusions of what is allowed, and what is not when discussing the "history" of the Book of Mormon witnesses.
This is THE pattern of all LDS research which is under the thumbs of the Brethren, which includes all LDS writing of BYU employed people.









66
Lem
God
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 am

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Lem »

Peterson has a problem with "supernatural creep" and the influence of beliefs in his discussion of alleged "eyewitness" accounts.
Supernatural creep is the way researchers hold onto their cherished ideas that a mysterious phenomenon, as they perceive it, is really out there.
Being too invested in the idea to let it go, they reinvent reality instead.

... it reveals a bit about human nature:

If you have to choose between the belief or a rational explanation, the rational explanation may be that which gets rejected.

https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive ... fiability/
IHAQ
God
Posts: 1531
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by IHAQ »

Why is what 11 family and close friends said in support of Joseph Smith’s claims more credible than what 11 of Donald Trump’s family and close supporters say in support of him?
IHAQ
God
Posts: 1531
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by IHAQ »

Gadianton wrote:
Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:31 pm
A person in whose face a pistol was brandished might well be unable to identify the brandisher of the pistol, but won’t likely be confused as to whether or not a gun
But they might not distinguish whether it was a genuine gun, or simply a prop. Especially if the gun were to be, say, hidden under a cloth. And what if the person brandishing the hidden gun was friendly with the witness into whose face it was supposedly being pointed, and was specifically wanting the witness to testify to the fact that he had a gun and had shown it to the witness. And then that witness turns out to be a brother or an in law...and the person was wanting to sell the gun for a high price...how credible is the witness then? And by the way, no gun could be presented to the enquirer because it had been taken back to the spirit world...
Lem
God
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 am

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Lem »

IHAQ wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:57 pm
Gadianton wrote:
Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:31 pm
But they might not distinguish whether it was a genuine gun, or simply a prop. Especially if the gun were to be, say, hidden under a cloth. And what if the person brandishing the hidden gun was friendly with the witness into whose face it was supposedly being pointed, and was specifically wanting the witness to testify to the fact that he had a gun and had shown it to the witness. And then that witness turns out to be a brother or an in law...and the person was wanting to sell the gun for a high price...how credible is the witness then? And by the way, no gun could be presented to the enquirer because it had been taken back to the spirit world...
Lol.

"He puzzled and puzzled till his puzzler was sore...
Then the Grinch thought of something he hadn't before...
Maybe Witness he thought doesn't come from pretending it's sure,
Maybe Witness perhaps means a little bit more..."

Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Dr Exiled »

IHAQ wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:57 pm
Gadianton wrote:
Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:31 pm
But they might not distinguish whether it was a genuine gun, or simply a prop. Especially if the gun were to be, say, hidden under a cloth. And what if the person brandishing the hidden gun was friendly with the witness into whose face it was supposedly being pointed, and was specifically wanting the witness to testify to the fact that he had a gun and had shown it to the witness. And then that witness turns out to be a brother or an in law...and the person was wanting to sell the gun for a high price...how credible is the witness then? And by the way, no gun could be presented to the enquirer because it had been taken back to the spirit world...
I don't think the apologists have ever come up with a good response to the witnesses' motives other than gloss over it and immediately recite how they stayed true. Martin Harris wanted to make money off of the book as he had mortgaged his farm to get the thing printed. Oliver Cowdery was closely in on the production and wanted a leadership role in the new church. David Whitmer and his family were invested in helping Joseph throughout and being called to be a holy witness probably meant a lot to him, putting him in a prominent role. So, it probably wasn't too difficult for Joseph to lead these to see what he wanted them to see. Then why they supposedly stayed true can be explained by the apologists still believing in the book of abraham or Book of Mormon despite all the evidence. Once one takes a public position, recanting publicly is very difficult to do given the possible backlash or embarrassment, etc.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 6901
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Moksha »

"After the speaker finished, there was not a dry eye in the house, and we all left that BYU auditorium with a firm conviction that the cow had jumped over the moon."
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5283
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: An exotic new argument for eye-witness testimony

Post by Philo Sofee »

Moksha wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:37 pm
"After the speaker finished, there was not a dry eye in the house, and we all left that BYU auditorium with a firm conviction that the cow had jumped over the moon."
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Post Reply