RE: Testimony: Are we being hypocritical?
November 19, 2017 at 12:36 pm
(This post was last modified: November 19, 2017 at 12:51 pm by possibletarian.)
(November 19, 2017 at 10:20 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: I wasn't quite sure where to put this.
In light of everything going on in the county right now with powerful men and sexual assault/harassment, it got me thinking about our past discussions regarding testimony as evidence. Though there were some nuanced differences of opinion among the atheists who participated in those discussions, on the whole it seems most of us hold the position that testimony is not evidence, and that quantity speaks nothing of quality. Are we being hypocritical then, in accepting these allegations at face value? If we're being true to our stated position, then we're either:
1. Accepting a serious claim as true a despite total lack of evidence
Or
2. Accepting the testimony as evidence
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't believe these women. I'm also not conceding that the Bible qualifies as eye-witness testimony. I'm just wondering if we've been unfairly rigid to our theists in these debates regarding the nature of evidence.
Thoughts?
We can often prove that
a) the accused exists,
b) the accuser exists.
If then we can prove that these proven to exist people were in the same place at the same time, then we can move from there, the evidence and witnesses (who we can also prove existed) are interviewed, accounts drawn together, maybe scientific evidence produced if there is any, then conclusions drawn. Often the accused admits some kind of wrongdoing, even if denying the details of the accusers account of events.
But if then the accuser starts to say that a person was not there in person, but astrally projected himself to her room at night and made lewd suggestions and perhaps inappropriate astral touching, then that's when it gets into comparing properly. Eye witness accounts of the unprovable are not the same as for something we know happens, and can provide evidence of happening everyday.
I believe most theists when they relate something they have felt or experienced, well to a degree, as an ex Christian I know often the mind can exaggerate what you see to fit it in some spiritual context but mostly i believe experiences, and i think it's fair to say there are some things I cannot explain. Eyewitness or personal experience of the unlikely will always receive more scrutiny than a recounting of an everyday testable experience.
I think also we believe these accusations true simply because we have been hearing rumours over a long time, we know what men in power over people are like, and what they are likely to do, sometimes we will jump to conclusions which is a shame. But that is why we have a system of justice and the right to be judged by our peers to make at least an attempt to get to the bottom of any event if we choose to deny it ever happened.
P
'Those who ask a lot of questions may seem stupid, but those who don't ask questions stay stupid'