Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

DanielLC comments on Fake Justification - Less Wrong

40 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 01 November 2007 03:57AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (56)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DanielLC 13 October 2011 05:41:56AM 2 points [-]

a text that attributes the creation of existence to a diety while also giving me historical facts that at the time I may be able to verify, such as lineage, armies defeated by the Isreal tribes, and the such, then I would be more likely to follow this diety.

So, if someone wrote down his religeon a thousand years ago, you won't believe it, but if he adds some current events you will? That would only show that it was written at the time and not made up later. It doesn't make their beliefs correct.

If they give a lot of detail it might be evidence that what they wrote about miracles was correct (If the miracles were exaggerations, some of the historical facts would probably be exaggerated too).

You said that they should have historical facts that you are able to verify. I would consider this a fact justification unless you actually verify it. You might argue that someone else would have checked, and you'd know about it. Someone did check, but you wouldn't know about it.

The Bible does not have a perfect historical record. For example, it describes a large exodus of Isrealites that never happened.