Tip #11 Useful Diagnosis
Apr. 10th, 2015 12:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wingedbeast"The truth is that I don't have to convince you. According to the Bible, you already know, in your heart, that God is real."
In the medical procedural mystery series, House, Dr. House's team would often give him potential diagnoses that fit the evidence as they saw it, but had one of two important failings. Firstly, the diagnosis could not be tested to verify. Secondly, and more importantly, the diagnosis would leave no treatment options.
I don't know if I can convince you that I really don't believe. That kind of argument gets into the realm of philosophical solipsism. I find the topic interesting and fun for use in fiction, but not too valuable a discussion in getting to specific details.
I do know that the claim that a nonChristian is already a believer, just rebelling out of a desire to sin, is a useless diagnosis. You can't test true non-belief against believing rebellion. And, more importantly for your perspective, it doesn't leave you with anything you can actually do.
Check out alternate diagnoses, including those the nonbelievers themselves tell you. Consider how you can test those and consider how those possibilities might influence what you should do in certain circumstances.
If the best diagnosis you can come up with only leads you to the conclusion that you should do as you've always done, that it's the nonbeliever's failure for not converting from your witness, that is a useless diagnosis. Though, I do see how it can be tempting.
In the medical procedural mystery series, House, Dr. House's team would often give him potential diagnoses that fit the evidence as they saw it, but had one of two important failings. Firstly, the diagnosis could not be tested to verify. Secondly, and more importantly, the diagnosis would leave no treatment options.
I don't know if I can convince you that I really don't believe. That kind of argument gets into the realm of philosophical solipsism. I find the topic interesting and fun for use in fiction, but not too valuable a discussion in getting to specific details.
I do know that the claim that a nonChristian is already a believer, just rebelling out of a desire to sin, is a useless diagnosis. You can't test true non-belief against believing rebellion. And, more importantly for your perspective, it doesn't leave you with anything you can actually do.
Check out alternate diagnoses, including those the nonbelievers themselves tell you. Consider how you can test those and consider how those possibilities might influence what you should do in certain circumstances.
If the best diagnosis you can come up with only leads you to the conclusion that you should do as you've always done, that it's the nonbeliever's failure for not converting from your witness, that is a useless diagnosis. Though, I do see how it can be tempting.
no subject
Date: 2015-04-13 03:29 pm (UTC)"If x is true, what should I do about it" is one of the more useful questions I've learned to ask. (In work and out, although it's one of the methods I learned it from my method-heavy job.)
Edit because I left the conclusion out:
If "continue as default" is the answer too often, I get really suspicious. I wish other people would do that, too.