Black sheep: I have enjoyed reading your posts so im glad for your response. if there is anything i have learned from my past months here its that im a noob. i wont change any of his beliefs, not even make a tiny dent in any of it, even if im right and he is wrong. But that’s not what im trying to accomplish. My current belief with regards to jehovahs witnesses thought system is that it is unhealthy in the sense that it is not builds on facts, that it requires the person that hold it to be unaware of all facts, and had it learned and maintained by a certain way of thinking and relating to evidence (what Stephen Hassan calls mindcontrol). Those a hard accusations, but I believe that if this is the case, it should shine though a conversation with a witness to an outside observer (my girlfriend) – that’s why Im a bit reluctant to make the conversation very singular. It’s a bit of a pickle since on one hand im well aware that the conversation is very difficult to keep on track without getting distracted into unrelated subjects, but on the other hand, I really want her to see that if one really try to seek the truth in an objective, orderly and not out-of-the-arguments-book (I have read it) kind of way, the truth will become obvious that the jw way of arguing does not lead to the truth.
Nevertheless… I really hope to talk about 1914 in some way or another. And I would absolutely love a good discussion over the claim “mutations does not increase information” through an information-theoretical perspective J
Dave: Like I said to black sheep… if there is really no version of wt teaching which is clear of circular reasoning, that is properly the worst kind of problem I could possibly uncover, I think. It’s about finding a way to do it.. I have asked her to study the bible with me – just the two of us reading some meaningful portion of it (from the new testimony – last time I read the old testimony I couldn’t help making fun of all the crazy shit god did and that was kind of bad for her faith…) , without any commentaries or anything.. im pretty sure there are some good philosophical things in it and I really think it would be good for us both. However, as I wrote – she is *Really* tired of all bible based stuff right now.
OnTheWayOut: I very much hope you are right and I can do it in a way that keeps his attention… J .
Liberty, Td: interlectually, the 4 single most indefensible things about jw faith in my oppinion is blood, 1914(1919, 607), the way they are taught to treat and seek evidence and evolution/the ark. Of these, 1914 (and jesus selection in 1919) is the thing I would LOVE it to be about… thanks to scholar I feel quite confident on the range of arguments there is for, and especially the letter exchange some guy put online with bethel about 607 has me convinced that it’s a rotten doctrine. However, if he feels its not central to the faith… and that’s something I really need to check out… I think it would be dangerous to force the conversation in that direction, because it might leave an impression in my girlfriend that im not really seeking for the truth. Actually this is my current best idea – simply to have a conversation about how to find the truth, what evidence one should look at, and no real argument, but I digress. Now we are at it, I invite reianaa to answer any of the many questions I have asked her on certain posts on evolution, but we can all dream for things we properly wont get J -- TD: the nwt, the torture stick, Christmas, saying cheers… I totally agree there is nothing to gain by going into that stuff for a person who is not a *lot* more knowledgeable than me.
