RE: Testimony is Evidence
August 23, 2017 at 2:14 pm
(This post was last modified: August 23, 2017 at 2:24 pm by bennyboy.)
(August 23, 2017 at 10:24 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(bold mine)(August 23, 2017 at 8:05 am)bennyboy Wrote: Maybe I DO have a point, and I'm not being a dick for no reason. I'm being a dick because it's the most concise way to make obvious what should already BE obvious.
You could just as easily have said that Judas was the real hero or something like that. Either way it's not like I've never been a complete ass so I cannot fault you too much for using hyperbole now and then. You're one of my favorite members and I hate to see you start treating believers with contempt like so many do. Roadrunner has been taking the high road on this one.
High horse, you mean. RR keeps insisting that he's just interested in the idea of testimonial in general, and that he is definitely NOT talking about religious ideas. However, based on how the thread has unfolded, I find this so highly implausible that I've openly declared I that I believe him to be lying.
Why do we not have several examples of testimony to examine and consider? Anyone with a general interest in jurisprudence would produce some typical examples: identifying people in a lineup, for example, or dependence on potentially unreliable "expert" witnesses; in a matter of a minute, I could probably produce a list of 10 or 20 examples worth discussion. I've just scrolled through 20 pages of this thread, and found a conspicuous absence of testimonial cases whose evidentiary value we are to consider.
It's like I made a thread about the value of cars, but carefully refrained from ever mentioning any actual cars. Why would I do that?
