When you do, can you try to answer: “it feels right” is unacceptable in other areas of study; why’s it a valid justification here?
Conversation
I wrote more on my blog in response your questions the other day. Thanks for asking. bjhomer.blogspot.com/2014/04/mormon
1
Thanks. Not sure I understand. Are you saying “ ‘this communication came from God’ is not a hypothesis I’m trying to falsify”?
2
But I am saying that it's difficult to apply the traditional hypothesis model of inquiry to revelation. Does that help?
1
Yep, that’s what I needed to hear; thank you.
1
I would also assert that there are many things which are true, but not verifiable in that way. (e.g. 'My wife loves me.')
1
Hm. There are observations which could falsify that hypothesis, though. Are there observations which could falsify your faith?
4
But if one perceived revelation is false, how do I explain others that were true, and contained new information?
3
I’m not sure how literal you’re being when you say “information.” Assume it’s not like “stars are made of hydrogen.” Example?
2
But when it happens repeatedly, you start to see a pattern.
2
Replying to
Gotcha. What I see is a different threshold at which we are willing to accept new axis. Makes sense. My “cost” is extremely high.
Replying to
Honestly, I understand your POV. I do think it's real, but have no way to show you other than encouraging you to try it. :)
1
Right, interesting experiment in general: “what if axia were much cheaper?” Seems much more dangerous to me, but worth trying.
1
Show replies