> Paul Brandon: > At the same time, Jim, it should be clear that if you do take the > article at face value, then it's neither desperate nor prejudicial to > suggest something like dementia as the cause of the change.
To suggest it as a possibility is not prejudicial. To leap to it so quickly IS. If you look at the percentage of mentally active octogenarians, the percentage of Alzheimer's would put those afflicted in a small subgroup. So if we wish to posit a change in someone's ideology, other factors would be more plausible than dementia. Further, to posit dementia as a cause for a change from atheism to theism requires more than just suggesting it, it requires demonstrating why this would be so. What little I picked up from Flew's comments I found nothing of the typical irrational religious (and non-religious) ideation. > Paul Brandon: > If you > assume that something caused him to change his mind, you've got just a > few serious contenders: > > (1) Some kind of mental decline, so that arguments he already correctly > rejected (i.e., those in the article) now convince him. Who says he correctly rejected them? An ex-racist can say he correctly rejected another race as equal, but now sees that previous position as unfounded. > (2) He had never thought about the argument from ignorance before, and > when it occurred to him, he was convinced by it. Of course if that's the > case, then this isn't much of a "victory", because the man never knew > much about the issue. Good point. > (3) He came up with some other kind of argument, a new one, which he > found convincing. That's the best hope for the "true believer", but > there's not a word about it in the article. True. > As written, anyway, the article suggests a mental decline, as it > presents him as knowledgeable, eliminating my #2, and doesn't mention > any new arguments, steering us away from my #3. See my previous comment. You're assuming his original thinking was correct -- how would you go about proving this? I've met some religious individuals who used to be atheists. They claim that the reasons for their atheism eventually began to make less sense. Now, chances are they never bought these arguments completely in the first place. But of course! Who says someone believes or doesn't believe in something completely and absolutely perpetually? I have my moments of atheism just as no doubt the atheist has a fleeting thought of a "higher power." Respectfully, Jim Guinee --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
