Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!scott
From: scott@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Scott Deerwester)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: what does it mean to talk to God [a brief attempt at an answer]
Message-ID: <368@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Mar-85 11:38:03 EST
Article-I.D.: gargoyle.368
Posted: Wed Mar 13 11:38:03 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 14-Mar-85 05:22:00 EST
References: <893@topaz.ARPA> <2635@mcnc.UUCP> <366@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Reply-To: scott@gargoyle.UUCP ( Deerwester)
Organization: U. Chicago - Computer Science
Lines: 53
Xref: watmath net.religion:6005 net.religion.christian:429
Summary: 


>> A cute satire, but there's an important flaw here exists in a lot of
>> what you and others say about the role of personal experience.  I've
>> read a few dozen articles, the gist of which is, "what makes your
>> experience any more valid that the experiences of {Rich Rosen,
>> Buddhists, Ubizmologists, ...}?"  The difference is that mine aren't
>> made-up examples.
>>
>> All that you're doing is saying, "See, I can make up an example of a
>> personal experience that clearly has no relationship to reality.
>> Therefore no personal experiences, including yours, can be used as
>> the basis for anything."  Sorry, but I'm not convinced.
>
>[FLAME ON]
>How *DARE* you claim that I made up my example!!!  I really experienced
>all the things I described, and who are YOU to claim that it's all
>falsified or made-up????
>
>Oh, I see, *you* can claim that MINE are made up, but I can't claim that
>YOURS are made up.  Quite a double standard there.
>

Point one:

I claim that I believe that the experiences that I allude to actually
happened.  You said that you were being satirical:

>[WARNING: Satire follows.]
>[Uhh, excuse me, but shouldn't that have gone at the BEGINNING of the article?]
>[Whoops, sorry...] ...
>				... If this offends you, realize that this is
>an example of satire.

implying that the experiences of which you spoke did not actually
occur.  What double standard?  *I* didn't claim that your experiences
were made up.  *You* did.  I just believed you.

Point two:

I referred also to claims that an Ubizmologist can say that he
experienced the same things the I claim, etc.  Asserting that it's
possible for some person with some set of beliefs can claim to
experience something isn't the same thing as first or second hand
recounting of specific experiences that real people have actually
had.  This is the main point of my article.
-- 
	Scott Deerwester
	Graduate Library School
	University of Chicago

...!ihnp4!gargoyle!scott	UUCP
scott@UChicago.CSNet		CSNet
scott@UChicago.ARPA		ARPA