Is objectivity in scholarship worth striving for? To borrow a line from Catholic theologian David Tracy, “ We belong to history just as much as history belongs to us.” We all stand within our own traditions, is it worth the effort to try and move out of that context in pursuit of objectivity or are we just kidding ourselves by dressing our work up in terms and methods that just gives the mere appearance?
MrStakhanovite wrote:Havoc has broken out in the comments section.
I'm still working my way through Blarg's comment.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
I thought you suggested the answer to your own questions:
Apologetics is a state of mind.
Approaching a subject from a scholarly position is another state of mind.
This also answers the "why attempt to be objective" question even if one accompanies one's self into any endeavor. As Kennedy said, "Not because it is easy, but because it is hard."
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
I'm guessing that this was a response to a thread already in progress.
What's the name of the original thread so I can merge this with it?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
