Thank you for explaining.
Conversation
Happy to answer! I may expound more on these questions in a blog post in a few days.
2
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?
2
1
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
(thread resurrection) blog post from this morning on falsifying faith: timesandseasons.org/index.php/2014
9
Replying to
I have lots and lots to say regarding Popperian epistemology, but not in 140char. ;)