The new definition of Proof for the Apologists

[_DonBradley]

Gadfly:

If I were you, Gad, I'd feel rather complimented at this nickname. You're the board Socrates!

by the way, has anyone studied the etymology of Gadianton? Could it come from "gadfly"?

Don

[_Daniel Peterson]

This board's Socrates.

Wow.

Would that be like being the tallest mountain peak in Kansas?

It's all relative.

Cyril "Barmy" Fotheringay-Phipps, a friend of Bertie Wooster's, is described by P. G. Wodehouse as having "the IQ of a backward clam," but he's considered by his fellow members of the Drones Club to be "something of a dangerous intellectual."

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Good morning Dean Robbers,

I appreciate the thought you shared with us reference the attempt to redefine a proof by Mormon apologists. This has been bothersome to me for quite some time, especially so since our Mormon colleagues know better given their mandates in academia.

It was yesterday, in fact, that I was visited by two young Mormon missionaries in my quiet cul-de-sac; this the first time in my six years living here being proselytized by the Mormon faith, as it were. I was genuinely surprised to hear a knock at my door on this peaceful Sunday afternoon, wondering who it could be. After the initial shock of seeing the two Mormon missionaries I invited them inside and offered them a glass of water. Over the course of the ensuing conversation it became clear to me Mormons conflate the idea of proof with “absolute metaphysical certitude”, and indeed if you’re to exercise your god-given natural skepticism toward their claims you are, in a sense, “guilty of being a "positivist"”. To further demonstrate the power Mormon apologists now have within the Mormon evangelical meme, our friend and colleague, Professor Peterson was actually referenced, or “sourced” as it were, when discussing some challenging Book of Mormon issues. This young Mormon missionary, rather than quote Joseph Smith or a current Mormon apostle deferred to Professor Peterson’s apologia.

This was a stunning revelation to me! A coup has, I’m sure, inadvertently been achieved within the Mormon Church. A Mormon professor’s apologetic conjecture is now being touted as doctrine by Mormon missionaries. And it’s this “absolute metaphysical certitude” being bandied about by Mormon apologists that has come to replace direct quotes from a myriad of Mormon prophets, apostles, and official Mormon publications such as The Ensign, by the mouthpieces of the Lord!

What a moment to be had. And what a timely bit of confluence between your thoughts, and my pleasant little visit from the Mormon missionaries!

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_Some Schmo]

This board's Socrates.

Wow.

Would that be like being the tallest mountain peak in Kansas?

Well, either that or the smartest apologist defending Mormonism.

[_Gadianton]

Hi there Doctor Cam,

thanks for your insights. I'm sure many here will be stunned to learn that missionaries have DCP awareness now. That was not true when I was a missionary. I'm curious, how did they introduce DCP's expertise?

Don't forget the staff meeting friday.

[_karl61]

missionaries have the thoughts of DCP but know very little about the life of Joseph Smith - interesting. I think the LDS Church wants it that way.

[_Brackite]

This board's Socrates.

Wow.

Would that be like being the tallest mountain peak in Kansas?

It's all relative.

The wind-blown top of Kansas....



Mount Sunflower:

Elevation: 4,039 feet / 1,231 meters

WEST KANSAS TOPOGRAPHY


Mt. Sunflower is the high point of Kansas, hence the name Mt. "Sunflower" since Kansas is the "Sunflower State". What Kansas is not is a mountain state. I do believe that state high points should count as summits, as long as there is a reasonable hill with a view from the top. Kansas is a flat state however, and not very exciting to drive through, except for the Central Kansas hill country. Mt. Sunflower is in extreme Western Kansas (near the Colorado border) in Wallace County, and is actually a hill, with a nice view. It is probably not much more than 50 feet up from the beginning of the trailhead to the top.

It is certainly a high point in the area because the wind was pretty substantial blowing in my face, coming down directly from the summit. In fact, Kansas is certainly not the flattest state highpoint (DE, Florida, IN, IA, and RI are all flatter). The Kansas highpoint is actually high enough to have an unobscured view of the surrounding areas, so that a person can see for miles and miles.

( Link: http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... lower.html )

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Absolute metaphysical certitude? Isn't that an absolute contradiction in terms? And what in the world are Mormons doing using a word like "metaphysical"? I don't think it should be allowed under any circumstances.

[_Paracelsus]

as far as I know the tallest mountain peak in Denmark is 173 m (Ejer Bavnehøj).

(or is it Yding Skovhøj or Møllehøj?)
If we compute the max. differencial height, it is 180 m, as the min. height is -7 m (Lammefjord).
by the way the root of høj may be the same as of height.

It's all relative.

He is right.

Got it? Daniel Peterson is right!