@fmf saidThis phenomena is the reason the flat earth society exists.
"We think we know a lot because even though individually we know very little because we treat the knowledge in the minds of others as our own." ~ Sloman and Fernbach
How much does the 'knowledge illusion' affect the stances you take on issues and topics here on this forum?
We all know (sic) that the earth is spheroid but how many of us can actually prove it I wonder.
@divegeester saidPersonally, I think that this was FreakyKBH's 'point' with his flat-Earth riff here and on the General Forum some time back, i.e. if we trust expert/clever people to tell us that the world is spheroid, based on their expertise, when we personally don't have the expertise to prove it, why not trust expert/clever Christians [like him, presumably] to tell everybody about the "truth" of God?
This phenomena is the reason the flat earth society exists.
We all know (sic) that the earth is spheroid but how many of us can actually prove it I wonder.
I called him on this immediately, so maybe it was pride that made him stick to his guns and then use the regurgitated details of flat-Earthism to troll those who engaged him and rebutted his 'arguments' one after the other ~ and therefore causing him to abandon its pretence as, at best, a rather droopy almost C.S.Lewis-level thought exercise.
The peerlessly pretentious FreakyKBH was not the kind of poster who liked to be called out for his transparently lumpen forum contributions immediately ~ by the likes of me, especially ~ when he thought he had something clever afoot.
16 May 19
John of Salisbury wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."
Do you mean something like this ?
Today we stand upon the shoulders of Peter, Paul, and Martin Luther. To tell the truth, I wish I had come along later. Then I could stand upon your shoulders; as it is, you are upon mine.Witness Lee The Completing Ministry of Paul
Or
I have been in the recovery for over fifty years. My time is nearing the end. There is still something that needs completing. This will fall upon your shoulders. You will continue this completing ministry, ... .
Is that kind of what you're talking about Ghost ?
16 May 19
@sonship saidJohn of Salisbury was writing in the late 1110s.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."
Do you mean something like this ?
Today we stand upon the shoulders of Peter, Paul, and Martin Luther. To tell the truth, I wish I ...[text shortened]... ntinue this completing ministry, ... .
Is that kind of what you're talking about Ghost ?
Does that precede Nee and Lee?!
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
John of Salisbury was writing in the late 1110s.
Does that precede Nee and Lee?!
That is irrelevant.
Paul and Luther predate that. So what? The principle of realizing that you "stand on the shoulders," so to speak, is the issue.
You admire it in John of Salisbury.
Others admire it in Witness Lee and Watchman Nee.
16 May 19
@sonship saidHow is it irrelevant?
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
John of Salisbury was writing in the late 1110s.
Does that precede Nee and Lee?!
That is irrelevant.
Paul and Luther predate that. So what? The principle of realizing that you "stand on the shoulders," so to speak, is the issue.
You admire it in John of Salisbury.
Others admire it in Witness Lee.
John of Salisbury said it first. As such I tip my hat to the original quote, not those who parroted it centuries later. (Mentioning Paul and Luther was the irrelevant thing, as they were the subjects of the quote, not the author of it).
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
How is it irrelevant?
What is irrelevant is the quality of appreciating forgoing knowledge / wisdom has to do with the TIME in history when such a virtue is had.
John of Salisbury wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."
John of Salisbury said it first.
You think no one ever had this attitude before John of Salisbury made note of it? Why should we believe he invented such an attitude?
As such I tip my hat to the original quote, not those who parroted it centuries later.
I thought you tipped your hat [edited] to the quality of the attribute of recognizing one has to give credit to predecessors.
I'm sure you don't think such a thing STARTED with your quoter.
(Mentioning Paul and Luther was the irrelevant thing, as they were the subjects of the quote, not the author of it).
Here's the relevancy. In a quality you admire HERE, I, in another thread pointed out was possessed by Witness Lee. That's the fellow you were working hard at to disqualify as a decent human being.
If the quality is to be admired over here with Bernard of Chartres and/or John of Salisbury, I mentioned that the trait was also admired by some Christians concerning Witness Lee and Watchman Nee, who both admitted the very same appreciation to predecessors.
"But my guy said it first" is irrelevant to the quality of the virtue.
Is it not to be respected in someone who may have said something similar a thousand years earlier ? Is it less to be admired because in some other area someone else confessed a similar gratitude 300 years from now ?
@sonship saidHow much does the 'knowledge illusion' affect the stances you take on issues and topics here on this forum?
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
How is it irrelevant?
What is irrelevant is the quality of appreciating forgoing knowledge / wisdom has to do with the TIME in history when such a virtue is had.
[quote] John of Salisbury wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more ...[text shortened]... e admired because in some other area someone else confessed a similar gratitude 300 years from now ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
16 May 19
How much does the 'knowledge illusion' affect the stances you take on issues and topics here on this forum?
If the premise of your OP is indeed true then there is no way you can find out. That is unless I suspended the rule temporarily to assume Sloman and Fernback have an axiom which applies to others but not to themselves.
"We think we know a lot because even though individually we know very little because we treat the knowledge in the minds of others as our own." ~ Sloman and Fernbach
- Joined
- 06 May 15
- Moves
- 27444
17 May 19
@fmf saidI think I'm not really in a position to say. 😉
"We think we know a lot because even though individually we know very little because we treat the knowledge in the minds of others as our own." ~ Sloman and Fernbach
How much does the 'knowledge illusion' affect the stances you take on issues and topics here on this forum?
@sonship saidSloman and Fernbach suggested that we think we know a lot ~ even though individually we know very little ~ because we treat the knowledge in the minds of others as our own. Do you think there is truth in what they say?
If the premise of your OP is indeed true then there is no way you can find out. That is unless I suspended the rule temporarily to assume Sloman and Fernback have an axiom which applies to others but not to themselves.
"We think we know a lot because even though individually we know very little because we treat the knowledge in the minds of others as our own." ~ Sloman and Fernbach
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
. Do you think there is truth in what they say?
Yes.
There is knowledge gained by our own subjective experience.
There is knowledge gained by the experience of others.
Some knowledge and wisdom passed on to us by the sure experience of others is valuable and true. Otherwise things like parenting would be useless.
Some of the wisdom was passed on to us second hand, and we then CONFIRM its truthfulness.
Some of the wisdom was passed on to us second hand, which is not too completely true or that we misunderstand or is wrong.
Some of what we pass on to others as knowledge is above the level of our own personal subjective attainment. Some of that can be useful for others as they will build on it.
Now let Divegeester find what book I am plagiarizing verbatim or approximately, these thoughts.
Get back to me so I can give credit. I mean it HAD to be lifted from SOMEWHERE. Right ?
17 May 19
@sonship saidIt's all a bit precarious and arbitrary though, isn't it? You create no "knowledge illusion" for me. For others maybe you do. I am interested in the idea of a creator but I don't think you have any knowledge about him or her or it. Your illusions, if that's what they are, are not mine. You probably quite sincerely believe that you are a source of knowledge that your intended audience doesn't possess but they rely on.
@FMF. Do you think there is truth in what they say?
Yes.
There is knowledge gained by our own subjective experience.
There is knowledge gained by the experience of others.
Some knowledge and wisdom passed on to us by the sure experience of others is valuable and true. Otherwise things like parenting would be useless.
Some of the wisdom was pa ...[text shortened]... thoughts.
Get back to me so I can give credit. I mean it HAD to be lifted from SOMEWHERE. Right ?