• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Something ( or two ) Shermer said on the P&T:BS bible episode.....

Pauliesonne

Bi Gi
Pauliesonne
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,687
" It's mythic storytelling. Nothing else. "

&

" The bible has written all over it that it is a socially constructed, human-edited collection of books written over many, many centuries. "

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I agree with this for many reason but I'm not 100% positive about it. If anybody else here has seen this, what do you think of what Shermer said and do you agree or disagree with him.
 
Pauliesonne said:
" It's mythic storytelling. Nothing else. "

&

" The bible has written all over it that it is a socially constructed, human-edited collection of books written over many, many centuries. "

Now, I agree with this for many reason but I'm not 100% positive about it. If anybody else here has seen this, what do you think of what Shermer said and do you agree or disagree with him.
Click to expand...
What reason is there to disagree? How does the bible differ from any other mythology? You've got people talking to gods, mystical events, magic, miracles, outrageous claims.

If we can clearly see the influence of culture on Greek and Roman Mythology, why can we not clearly see it with the tales in the bible? There is a story of a guy being swallowed by a whale, a flood that covered the entire earth and a man who gathered two of ever "kind" of animal. A man walking on water, turning water into wine, beings with wings, a story of a man (Job) who is used as a bet whose wife and children are killed as part of a deal struck between god and Satan. And BTW, who recorded these stories? Who witnessed these things and wrote them down?

Let's not forget that other cultures also had similar tales. Why is the bible special?
 
Paulie, it's difficult to be 100% certain about anything this complicated. Shermer was expressing his opinion, based on the best available facts.

The religious are allowed to be 100% sure about things but skeptics must always leave room for doubt. I'm sure that, no matter how positive Shermer is about this, he remains open to the remote possibility that he is wrong.

For the record, I agree with him completely.
 
I had a conversation a while ago with a friend about the possibility of a wiki bible.

I told him that it already was.
 
Oleron said:
The religious are allowed to be 100% sure about things but skeptics must always leave room for doubt. I'm sure that, no matter how positive Shermer is about this, he remains open to the remote possibility that he is wrong.
Click to expand...

It is a way to always be excused for being wrong; just say 'I allowed for that possibility!'
 
What exactly is the alternative? It is either a collection of self-contradicting, highly improbable short stories, OR...

Word of God? What does that even mean, exactly? Even the religious devoute believe that plain, ordinary humans did the actual pen-pushing. If the claim is that in some undefined manner, through some undefined means, a supernatural being somehow influenced the writings that became the bible, then I don't see how we could possibly "prove" that to be incorrect.
 
T'ai Chi said:
It is a way to always be excused for being wrong; just say 'I allowed for that possibility!'
Click to expand...

Nahh. Skeptic's still take a position. Here I'll do it right now:

The Bible is a gigantic hunk of crap. It is a poorly written, highly improbable, shattered narrative with no clear collective moral message. It is inferior to Harry Potter in many ways, including that Potter is more believable, has a clearer narrative, and possesses fewer instances of genocide.

Now, I may be wrong, and being a good skeptic, I will change my mind if presented with better evidence. However, I am at present time more worried about being wrong about the veracity of Harry Potter than I am about being wrong about the megalithic craptacular sham-fest commonly known as The Bible.
 
Just something I've always wondered about mythic storytelling.....

Do the writers believe they are telling the truth?
 
What is the difference between "storytelling" and "mythic storytelling"?

Depending on the answer, I think there might be a contradiction between the two statements. If, as I understand it, these stories had a purpose, namely, to put early christianity in the best light in their (then) current context and to promote the faith, then the "Nothing else" part of Schermer's position woud be clearly in error.
 
SezMe said:
What is the difference between "storytelling" and "mythic storytelling"?

Depending on the answer, I think there might be a contradiction between the two statements. If, as I understand it, these stories had a purpose, namely, to put early christianity in the best light in their (then) current context and to promote the faith, then the "Nothing else" part of Schermer's position woud be clearly in error.
Click to expand...

Storytelling is just that, telling a story. It's a broad category which includes epics, myths, detective novels, bad jokes, etc. Mythic storytelling is a specific type of storytelling which deals with gods, angels, probably even the supernatural in general.

It's kind of like asking what's the difference between Rocky Road and ice cream.

Marc
 
Rustle said:
The Bible is a gigantic hunk of crap. It is a poorly written, highly improbable, shattered narrative with no clear collective moral message. It is inferior to Harry Potter in many ways, including that Potter is more believable, has a clearer narrative, and possesses fewer instances of genocide.
Click to expand...

And you're welcome to your opinion/narrative.

The Bible is probably the most influential text of all time, so, apparently, there are a few (*giggle*) that disagree with your opinion/narrative. Hard to believe, I know.

Now, I may be wrong,
Click to expand...

You may be right about that. ;)
 
T'ai Chi said:
And you're welcome to your opinion/narrative.

The Bible is probably the most influential text of all time, so, apparently, there are a few (*giggle*) that disagree with your opinion/narrative. Hard to believe, I know.
Click to expand...

When you are done with your girlish giggling, perhaps you could explain why we should lend any weight to an argument based on the logical fallacy called "Appeal to popularity"?

T'ai Chi said:
You may be right about that. ;)
Click to expand...

May be. But is he?
 
Just because the Bible is influential, that doesn't make it right. ET on the 2600 was a huge seller, as was PacMan, but there were majorly terrible games. Decisions made by herds aren't necessarily right because most individuals agreed.
 
Pauliesonne said:
Just something I've always wondered about mythic storytelling.....

Do the writers believe they are telling the truth?
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

No, they are not telling factual history and they don't think they are. In fact, this wasn't even a concept that existed when the Bible and other mythic tales were told and written.

Yes they are telling a story that contains truths about human nature. Novels are the same, but today we have a concept called "fiction" to cover this type of storytelling.
 
Almo said:
Just because the Bible is influential, that doesn't make it right. ET on the 2600 was a huge seller, as was PacMan, but there were majorly terrible games. Decisions made by herds aren't necessarily right because most individuals agreed.
Click to expand...

I disagree! Pacman on the 2600 was still a fun game, even if it looked terrible compaired to the arcade version (and that's really saying something).

But more seriously, I'm not sure the best way to point out the nature of the appeal to popularity fallicy is to point out something subjective like taste in games. I'd probably point to something like geocentricity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom