*More from the archives. This is the finished part of an unfinished paper on pluralism I was supposed to write for a class on apologetics, which project marriage and moving forced me to abandon. My professor was pleased enough with my other paper (one half of the requirements) to give me a D- for the class. (Imagine if I had completed all the work!)*
One of the most shocking experiences for me happened during my first year at a new liberal arts college. The class was Logic and the lesson was on the law of non-contradiction: “‘A’ and ‘not a’ cannot both be true at the same time and in the same manner.” The example given was a man saying to his neighbor, “My grandfather has passed away, but it’s all right, because I know he’s in heaven now.” The neighbor replies, “How can he be alive in heaven if he’s dead, since death means the cessation of life?” Either he’s alive in heaven, or he’s completely dead and gone. But one girl on the right side of the room raised her hand and asked, “Why can’t he be both?” And she could not be dissuaded. As far as she was concerned there was no fallacy in assuming that he could be in heaven for his grandson, and nowhere at all for the neighbor—in the same sense, at the same time. Continue reading “Pluralism Notes”
neumatikos 