(November 16, 2015 at 3:11 am)robvalue Wrote: Yes I do apply the "science" to myself. I don't assume my memories are always correct. In fact, I've often overruled my memories as unreliable because I have reason to do so. But you want a false dichotomy where either my memories are totally reliable or worthless, to me. That's not reality, that's binary thinking which is sadly extremely common in debates with theists. I made a whole topic about it here. Whether or not a whole other person's testimony is reliable to me is a completely different question.
Whether it's reliable for a court, or for science, is yet another question. These are not all the same issue.
The part I bolded and highlighted above is all I'm asking for. I haven't said that they are completely reliable or completely unreliable. And if the physical evidence points to me being guilty of something, and yet I remember distinctly being somewhere and doing something completely different at the time, It's not even going to cross my mind, that I may be mistaken.
I don't assume that testimony is unreliable, especially when it is shown to be good testimony. But we do need to test our witnesses, including ourselves.
