Thinking Processes Part 4

Here is another of the thinking processes:

Insufficient Cause
The insufficient Cause reservation questions if the cause is sufficient to cause the effect by itself. You might say “If I flip the light switch, then the light will turn on”. This reservation then asks: Is flipping the light switch sufficient to turn on the light? Be careful, this takes thinking! Can flipping the switch be insufficient? What if the power to the house is off? What if the bulb is burned out? What if…while, you get idea. Let’s look at some biblical examples.

In the Story of Jacob, Laban, and Laban’s daughters from Gen. 29, Laban offers to marry his daughter Sarah for seven years of labor. Jacob believes his seven years of labor will allow him to marry Sarah, but is this true? Does something else need to happen also?

Unfortunately for Jacob, tradition dictated Laban must marry his eldest daughter first. Laban tricks Jacob into marrying the older daughter Leah. The Jacob works another seven years to take Sarah as a second wife.

Mat 4:4 But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

Critical Thinking Processes Part 3

I've finally had time to return to the blog. I'm keeping this short, only adding one reservation category, but I'm getting something posted NOW.

Causality
The causality reservation questions if a cause and effect relationship exists.

Job 22:3 Is it any pleasure to the Almighty that you are righteous, or gain to Him that you make your ways perfect?

Here Eliphaz is questioning if making Job righteous is of any gain to GOD.

Eve would have done well to apply this to the statement by the serpent in Genesis 3:5.

Gen 3:5 for God knows that in the day you eat of it, then your eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as God, knowing good and evil.

Gal 4:16 So then did I become your enemy speaking to you the truth?

Here is a New Testament example of Paul question the Galatians if his speaking the truth caused him to become their enemy.

If you're reading this, and taking it seriously, I encourage you to check these examples in context . If you agree with me, watch for you own examples both in your life, and in your bible reading.

God's Plan for my life

You may have noticed I haven't been posting frequently. I took a vacation and expected to post again when I returned. Instead I have a new job out of state and am preparing to move. I'll resume normal posting in late September.

Grand Theft Walrus

I considered making some serious point about about two and three dimensions and how we simplify and complecate things. Then I realized I just wanted to post my Simpson's avatar with the Grand Theft Walrus T-Shirt. Enjoy

Authentic Beyond Comfort

It hit me today that we all get uncomfortable with truths when they greatly defy our expectations. We see this manifest both in the Church and in Science. In the church is seen in legalism and in despair. In science we see it in Darwinism and in pseudoscience. I'll be clear; science isn't about truth, but validity. However, many seek truth from science and validity is the closest (but insufficient) substitute for truth.

The most common truth that makes me uncomfortable is the pain of others. I want to deny people hurt as much as they do. I want to think I can fix pain. May God help me accept truth.

Thinking Processes Part 2

While most people give it little thought, we encounter many cause and effect relationships every day. In a perfect world, all of these would be based on completely accurate assumptions and lead to good actions. Unfortunately, cause and effect logic is often used when the presenter doesn’t know the assumption, doesn’t want you to know the assumption, or is in some other way mixing truth and falsehood (sometimes intentionally and other times unconciously). For this reason, if we are to use this same logic GOD has given us to aid our understanding of the world around us, or even scripture, we should know how to determine if a proposed cause and effect statement is valid. For this purpose, we use the catagories of legitamite reservation:

-Clarity (is the statement correctly communicated)

-Entity Existance (Can/Do the cause and effect both exist)

-Causality (does the cause really lead to the effect)

-Insufficient Cause (Does one or more additional causes need to be true to create the effect)

-Additional Cause (Can a different cause create the effect)

-Predicted Effect (This is a little more complex, so I'll explain it later)

For this post, I take a closer look at the Clarity and Entity Existance catagories

Clarity
The clarity reservation is simply a check of whether our understand of the presented suffiencient cause relationship matches the presenters intent. This should always be the first reservation applied. It makes no sense to waste any of our short lives arguing or debating something we don’t truly disagree about.

A scriptural example of a clarity reservation can be found in 1 Corinthains 3:5-7. Here Paul corrects those in Corinth that believe they have been saved by the men spreading GOD’s word.
1Co 3:5-7 “Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom you believed, even as the Lord gave to each? I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither is he who plants anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase.”

Entity Existence

The entity existance reservation is simply questioning if the cause and effect in a relationship either currently exist or can exist as claimed.

GOD shows us the entity existance reservation in Gen 13:16: "And I will make your seed as the dust of the earth, so that if a man can count the dust of the earth, then shall your seed also be counted."

-

Thinking Processes Part 1

Nessesary Condition & Sufficient Cause Thinking

The most basic part of the TOC thinking processes is the cause and effect relationships found all around us. These relationship are thought of in terms of nessesary conditions (in order to achieve [B], I must [A] ) and Sufficient Cause (unless we have [A], it will be impossible to achieve [B]). In order for this to be clear in further discussion, we will present this graphically with a couple examples from scripture. A simple way to read these representations is: if [necessary condition] then [objective].

Exo 8:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, Go unto Pharaoh, and say unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Let my people go, that they may serve me.
Exo 23:33b For if you serve their gods, it surely will be a snare to you.

In both of the examples we have GOD speaking directly, using cause and effect logic. Of course most readers will recognise at this point that not every cause and effect relationship we hear is true. For this purpose we will no look at the “hidden” assuptions in every cause effect relationship, and the methods of examing if a given relationship is legitamate.

Every cause and effect relationship we percieve has one or more underlying assumptions. In the diagram above, these assuptions are all located in the arrows. The following are two of the formats Scheinkopf for determining the assumptions:

In order to achieve [objective], I must [necessary condition] because [assumption]
Unless we have [necessary condition], it will be impossible to achieve [objective], because [assumption]
In simplier terms: If [necessary condition] the [objective], because [assumption].

Below is the format for showing an assumption within a sufficient cause diagram, along with an example from scripture.

Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I am naked, and I hid myself.

You can also look at the examples in figure 1 and determine the assumptions for those relationships.

To be continued...