Monday, June 27, 2011

Can You Say "Post Hoc?"

Advocates of reduced government spending will commit a serious effort if they fall for the trap of arguing directly with this report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/27/state-funding-cuts_n_885438.html

Instead, they should point out that the report's major premise commits an elementary logical fallacy, the post hoc, ergo proctor hoc fallacy. In English this means "after this, therefore because of this."

"After I broke my leg, I could not play the violin; therefore, I could not play the violin because I broke my leg."

Unfortunately, neither politicians nor the public care much about logic.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

NATO to Libyan civilians: Sorry, sort of

You can add another example of post-modern debasement of language (same-sex marriage, air-strikes don't qualify as hostilities, we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it).

NATO originally denied bombing civilian targets in Libya, but subsequently (a la Anthony Weiner) admitted it and issued an apology.

Reading between the lines, the apology means "in our mission to protect the civilian population of Libya, it is unavoidable that we will occasionally kill civilians, and that's a risk we are willing to take."

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Proving proof

In order to "prove" Christianity by:
Science
History
Archaeology
Philosophy
Etc

On must first "prove:"
Science
History
Archaeology
Philosophy
Etc.

Friday, June 17, 2011

The Tragedy of Anthony Weiner

Perhaps the greatest tragedy of this entire episode is the failure of both Weiner and the public to learn anything.

Weiner’s downfall, indeed the downfall of numerous people in public life demonstrates the truth of the proverb, “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.” Watching his tirades in Congress shows a consistently arrogant, self-righteous man. This is not to single him out for criticism; pride is a common fault of human nature – many of us struggle with it on a regular basis.

However, his original denial, subsequent confession and resignation indicate that he has learned nothing from the incident. There is no humility, no apparent contrition, and no remorse except for being caught.

The language of his resignation confirms this; “I am announcing my resignation…” One does not “announce” a resignation necessitated by moral failure; one issues a statement. Citing his efforts to represent those “without a voice,” and vowing to continue his efforts by other means is not the expression of true shame and remorse. These are the words of a proud, defiant person still trying to exalt himself.

Public apologies are only appropriate for public transgressions. His repeated public apologies to his wife, as part of his confession and this announcement, are inappropriate and only show his insensitivity to her humiliation.

What the public will fail to learn by portraying this as a political issue is that such moral failings are not “mistakes,” but sin against God. Again, Weiner is not alone in this reality. When David acknowledged his sin with Bathsheba, and the murder of her husband, his failure was not defined by his public actions, but by his rebellion against God’s law: “Against Thee, Thee only have I sinned.” Ps 51. He recognized that his sin could not be atoned for by religious observance, or “public” displays but only by a changed heart.

So it is with Anthony Weiner, and so it is with all of us.

The "Christian-right" should not be silent on this, nor should it try to make political capital. It should identify the true issues, i.e. sin and repentance, and remind everyone, Christian and non-Christian, that we all “fall short of the glory of God” in both word and deed. That Jesus Christ is the only “treatment” for our condition and that a regenerate mind is the only way to change a sinful heart.