Introducing this Section
We noticed a division in the types of religious discussions. Thus a suggestion from the audience arose that we could have one academic based discussion arena, where traditional academic formatting applied. It's not really intended to be a place where apologetics gets ramped up full force, testimony bearing or anything of the like.
If you wish to do that, use the standard religion section. Thanks for self-policing. |
|
Quote:
I guess. |
Quote:
SIEQ and Pelagius are well-acquainted with the academic techniques, but in some fields would be considered apologists. |
Just for clarification, if there is a discussion about Lamanites being the principal ancestors of the American Indian and I post a link showing that mitochondrial DNA studies show how poorly mitochondrial DNA performed in Iceland trying to link known ancestors as little as 150 years back, does that amount to a defensive argument or an academic technique or something else?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
There is a fine line, I suppose. Argument with exegesis and studies is certain apologia, but where the line is crossed can only be determined on a case by case basis. Just police yourself. If you want pure argument with academic allowance for oneself to be wrong or without surveying alternative interpretations, you're probably in the field of apologia. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I would like to officially lodge my protest of this new category. I think splitting the religion category like this is a BAD idea. I think both categories will be worse than the original religion category.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:07 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.