There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by Dr Exiled »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 12:36 am
Daniel Peterson,

A PERSONAL CHALLENGE for you. If there is no criticism against the church that is true, HOW will you continue defending church leaders who COVER UP sexual abuse, and pay out HUSH MONEY on cases (to the tune of many, many, many MILLIONS of dollars, if not BILLIONS) where even 5 year old girls (daughters are RAPED, and videoed for SICK SAKE!!!)) and the BISHOPS and STAKE PRESIDENTS are TOLD NOT TO TELL ANYONE... just WHO do you think is telling them to remain silent Daniel C. Peterson? Their ward members? :roll:

So if the church is still true, Are your sexually perverted leaders (the Apostles and Prophet who KNOW THIS IS HAPPENING AND DO NOTHING, THEY DO ***NOTHING*** about the problem, but hide it and PROTECT the leaders, not the victims) also still true Daniel? Do you still continually sustain these morally perverted cowards who lie about Jesus guiding them Daniel C. Peterson? Are you going to do the morally proper thing and stand up and denounce them? Or are you too a moral coward cut from their cloth?
I hope he responds and denounces the continual cover-up. Perhaps this is one area where criticism is allowed, where mistakes are made? Change first needs an admission of error as we all know. However, I predict either silence or silly justification or perhaps some victim blaming. The reputation of the church outweighs the unimportant victim, because, of course, the church never is wrong, ex hypothesi.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
drumdude
God
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by drumdude »

Rusty Nelson could eat a baby on the steps of the Salt Lake Temple and DCP would still feel obliged not to comment. He has taken blood oaths in the temple which forbid it.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by dastardly stem »

DrStakhanovite wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 4:52 am


Let’s try from the beginning. Do you think Craig would answer this question in the affirmative or negative? "I don't know" would be an acceptable answer.
Paulogia wrote:
Should we not apportion our belief to the amount of evidence provided?
Ultimately, I don't know. He's not a yes/no answer type of person. Depending on his audience, he may say something like this:

Well, now that's interesting...I would say, if there is any evidence for Christianity, then that's all we really need. The question is is there really any evidence for Christianity? And, of course, the answer would have to be, yes! Of course there is! There are millions of Christians to testify of their own personal conviction of Christianity. Therefore it need not matter if the evidence is "apportioned". But let's seriously assume any belief ought to be apportioned to the amount of evidence. If so, on Christianity, the answer to a question about whether it is apportioned would have to be yes! Of course! We have all sorts of arguments for Christianity. There's the Kalam argument for God, the Moral Argument, the Fine-tuning argument. There's the Ontological argument etc. And yet, even with all of that, a Christian doesn't need to know all of that evidence. He just needs an evidence--a personal conviction. And we all can see there is more than that! How can anyone possibly get more "apportioned" than that?! However on the atheist view, there can't be any grounding for objective morals and duties. There is no explanation for fine-tuning...there is no grounding for being or existence at all! On naturalism, there's no purpose at all to the universe. It just came into being from nothing--which is absurd! And...the atheist knows it. But on what basis could a naturalist answer this question in the affirmative? They can't! They have no basis to even state a "should", let alone say a Christian should. They are completely stuck. That's why they can't answer this question in the affirmative, well at least, not honestly. And that's why atheism is so bankrupt.

Now you ask if a Christian should? Well, I don't think the question really matters. We can already demonstrate it has a sufficient amount of evidence to warrant belief. But, this really comes from Hume.. and Hume's teaching simply doesn't work. It's an absurdity. How can anyone believe anything for that which we have no evidence for? We can illustrate this by examining the mind/body problem. How can naturalism explain thoughts that we have and how those interact with our physical brains? They can't. And yet, they don't accept God or a spirit which can be the source of these things. They have no evidence and yet they believe it. No one has evidence for every belief they hold so Hume didn't know what we was talking about. But, as far as evidence goes, the Christian has all the evidence in the world going for it. There simply is no better explanation than Christianity.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
huckelberry
God
Posts: 1267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by huckelberry »

DrStakhanovite wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 12:48 am
Philo Sofee wrote:
Thu Jul 28, 2022 12:18 pm
How is Peterson's modus operandi any different from William Lane Craig's who also thinks the same thing of his version and brand of Christianity?
(a) In 2015 Daniel Peterson gave a talk where he articulated a multi-volume book project that would take all the evidences for and against the inductively acquired belief in God (and by extension Mormonism) and parse them according to Bayesian probability that would hopefully generate an epistemically justified belief in the claims of the LDS Church that take criticisms fully into account.

(b) In 2022 Daniel Peterson posted a blog entry where he articulated an opinion that if one believes their inductively acquired belief in God (and by extension Mormonism) are true then there can be no valid evidence against the inductively acquired belief that are believed to be true. Why? Because if the inductively acquired belief is true, anything that entails the falsity of that inductively acquired belief is in itself false due to the logical principle of the excluded middle.

As it happens, (a) and (b) are contradictory. In (b) inductively acquired beliefs are bivalent, meaning they are assigned one of two values: true or false. Therefore, the assumption of the truth of an inductively acquired belief necessarily implies that the negation of the same inductively acquired belief be assumed false.

Yet in (a) inductively acquired beliefs are multivalent, bound by the values 1 and 0 with an infinite number of values in between. Once all the relevant values have been assembled and the appropriate calculations have been made, the result generated is a value that is supposed to represent justificatory strength of a belief which is suggestive of its truth.

Why did Daniel contradict himself? Based off this comment, I don’t think he intended to:
Daniel Peterson wrote:I’m not advocating a closed mind. I’m not saying that I refuse to consider evidence contrary to my religious beliefs. I’m not saying that there are no substantial arguments against Mormonism that deserve consideration. I’m not saying that every objection has been answered to the satisfaction of every rational and honest mind. I am saying that my conviction that the claims of Mormonism is true entails the corollary conviction that arguments against its truth are, in the end, wrong.
I think the spirit of the above fits better with (a) than (b), but because Daniel has absolutely no familiarity with any logical conventions, his meditations on epistemology are painfully confused. Kind of like someone tracing an image as opposed to drawing it freehand, he wants to give the illusion of competency instead of acquiring it by honest means.

Craig has written over a thousand pages across multiple peer reviewed books published by academic presses, he has never made such a basic conceptual error in any of them. Daniel Peterson is credentialed, but William Lane Craig is educated. Do not underestimate Evangelical scholars because they are popular punching bags for Youtubers.
Dr Stakanovite
I can see the conflict you are pointing out between the two statements. I suspect that Peterson is aware and is separating the two statements on a more fundamental level. I did not think he was trying to base his axiomatic the church is true upon the evidence compiled in the first statement. His belief that the church is true is prior to that. I think testimony is the LDS language for that. I am not saying that I am comfortable with that approach but I think Peterson is likely to be aware that logically the two statements are running on completely different tracks. One is evidence and reason the other is personal revelation establishing a truth prior to evidence we know about.
doubtingthomas
God
Posts: 1435
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:04 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by doubtingthomas »

Dr Exiled wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 5:22 am

I hope he responds and denounces the continual cover-up.
Was that posted in his blog?
drumdude
God
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by drumdude »

huckelberry wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 4:23 pm
One is evidence and reason the other is personal revelation establishing a truth prior to evidence we know about.
DCP is most concerned with maintaining the testimony of believers who have had a personal revelation. He attempts to create plausible explanations for the evidence against Mormonism. Even if those explanations are unlikely, as long as there is a chance, then a believer can tell themselves that it's still potentially true.

Of course, the likelihood of Mormonism being true is much harder to get at. Common sense tells most people that the likelihood of Mormonism being correct is extremely low. And apologists don't have many tools to convince anyone who hasn't had a personal revelation.

That's why missionaries attempt to create an emotional connection first. Everything then follows from feelings rather than reason. This is also how car salesmen get you to buy a larger car than you need.
User avatar
Rivendale
High Councilman
Posts: 554
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2021 5:21 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by Rivendale »

Dr Exiled wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 5:22 am
Philo Sofee wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 12:36 am
Daniel Peterson,

A PERSONAL CHALLENGE for you. If there is no criticism against the church that is true, HOW will you continue defending church leaders who COVER UP sexual abuse, and pay out HUSH MONEY on cases (to the tune of many, many, many MILLIONS of dollars, if not BILLIONS) where even 5 year old girls (daughters are RAPED, and videoed for SICK SAKE!!!)) and the BISHOPS and STAKE PRESIDENTS are TOLD NOT TO TELL ANYONE... just WHO do you think is telling them to remain silent Daniel C. Peterson? Their ward members? :roll:

So if the church is still true, Are your sexually perverted leaders (the Apostles and Prophet who KNOW THIS IS HAPPENING AND DO NOTHING, THEY DO ***NOTHING*** about the problem, but hide it and PROTECT the leaders, not the victims) also still true Daniel? Do you still continually sustain these morally perverted cowards who lie about Jesus guiding them Daniel C. Peterson? Are you going to do the morally proper thing and stand up and denounce them? Or are you too a moral coward cut from their cloth?
I hope he responds and denounces the continual cover-up. Perhaps this is one area where criticism is allowed, where mistakes are made? Change first needs an admission of error as we all know. However, I predict either silence or silly justification or perhaps some victim blaming. The reputation of the church outweighs the unimportant victim, because, of course, the church never is wrong, ex hypothesi.
Dan has spoken. He knows nothing https://tenor.com/search/sergeant-schul ... thing-gifs
malkie
High Councilman
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by malkie »

Rivendale wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 8:14 pm
Dr Exiled wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 5:22 am


I hope he responds and denounces the continual cover-up. Perhaps this is one area where criticism is allowed, where mistakes are made? Change first needs an admission of error as we all know. However, I predict either silence or silly justification or perhaps some victim blaming. The reputation of the church outweighs the unimportant victim, because, of course, the church never is wrong, ex hypothesi.
Dan has spoken. He knows nothing https://tenor.com/search/sergeant-schul ... thing-gifs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pkyy57iMaB0
huckelberry
God
Posts: 1267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by huckelberry »

drumdude wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:54 pm
huckelberry wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 4:23 pm
One is evidence and reason the other is personal revelation establishing a truth prior to evidence we know about.
DCP is most concerned with maintaining the testimony of believers who have had a personal revelation. He attempts to create plausible explanations for the evidence against Mormonism. Even if those explanations are unlikely, as long as there is a chance, then a believer can tell themselves that it's still potentially true.

Of course, the likelihood of Mormonism being true is much harder to get at. Common sense tells most people that the likelihood of Mormonism being correct is extremely low. And apologists don't have many tools to convince anyone who hasn't had a personal revelation.

That's why missionaries attempt to create an emotional connection first. Everything then follows from feelings rather than reason. This is also how car salesmen get you to buy a larger car than you need.
I think you are right here Drumdude. Peterson has a tendency to brush off question from doubters and exmormons. Answer for that is somewhat beyond his concern and he understands the limits on available answers.
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: There can be no evidence that Mormonism is false

Post by Dr Exiled »

doubtingthomas wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 7:29 pm
Dr Exiled wrote:
Fri Aug 05, 2022 5:22 am

I hope he responds and denounces the continual cover-up.
Was that posted in his blog?
He says he doesn't know enough to comment. Look at Rivendale's comment above.

Of course he could look into it, perhaps a little bit, and then discuss it. However, this clearly is a place where huge mistakes are being made, where criticisms are justified, where doubt grows from looking at what cojcolds is doing or not doing. So, I don't see anything substantive coming from Dr. Peterson.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
Post Reply