3 ms·
This is obviously a ridiculous idea that exposes the intellectual bankruptcy of the Rationalist “movement”, but it does remind me of this obscure religious move
by keiferski 6y ago
This is obviously a ridiculous idea that exposes the intellectual bankruptcy of the Rationalist “movement”, but it does remind me of this obscure religious movement from the 1600s.
The Muggletonians founded by John Reeve and Lodowick Muggleton in mid-17th century London believed that if a person were exposed to the full tenets of their faith and rejected it they would be irretrievably damned. This risk tempered proselytization: they hesitated to expose people to loss of salvation which may explain their low numbers. In the mid-19th century two wealthy Muggletonians Joseph and Isaac Frost broke with this cautious approach and published several books about the faith.
As they say, history doesn’t repeat, but it certainly rhymes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism#cite_note-37 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism#cite_note-37
- jdashg 6y agoRationalists aren't Basilisk believers in general, so the connection you draw here is stillborn.
- keiferski 6y agoSorry, how can a conclusion be stillborn? Does that have a specific meaning? Also: I was using it more as an example, not the sole reason.
- jdashg 6y agoThere's no argument you can successfully make that, because the Basilisk is unconvincing, therefore Rationalists are intellectually bankrupt. The connection is stillborn, because there's no path towards bridging the gap between this example and your conclusion. You will need to use other examples because this example is DOA.