Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.xcski.com!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: DB Cates <cates_db@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Observe the trend
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2025 14:12:11 -0500
Organization: University of Ediacara
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vr4jeb$1h13f$1@solani.org>
References: <vqpa3k$1vbsh$2@dont-email.me>
 <csf0tjl5i3ha9jsha3aki8b2rp0nrb6uqn@4ax.com> <vqq50f$254gg$1@dont-email.me>
 <rn03tj9u0n6pr86t6a6q0d1ju066htbm3d@4ax.com> <vqtmbe$32o3u$1@dont-email.me>
 <57n5tj9gjhbo0rnmkffrqtmumjd8ru5c93@4ax.com> <vqvcgh$3pg29$1@dont-email.me>
 <e0o7tj1tq4gnlq44g1rfhqvnvctvbkfdkt@4ax.com> <vr0rvp$vs38$1@dont-email.me>
 <jgl8tj1qm963i0cj3joknts1po6j9smqh8@4ax.com>
 <s55atjlkhk0ncoio326jqkkgbgbcdktl28@4ax.com> <vr3lib$3bev4$1@dont-email.me>
 <92bbtjhp1n4d0vc6us5terbdvrdp0vdij1@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="22004"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pdsyVFu/YmtFCzvs7iwu/eQTuY8=
Return-Path: <news@reader6.news.weretis.net>
X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
	id 10F6422978C; Sat, 15 Mar 2025 15:12:26 -0400 (EDT)
	by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1E85229783
	for <talk-origins@ediacara.org>; Sat, 15 Mar 2025 15:12:23 -0400 (EDT)
	id 072341C1041; Sat, 15 Mar 2025 19:12:16 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
	by newsfeed.bofh.team (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 008411C0115
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Sat, 15 Mar 2025 19:12:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pmx.weretis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 135173E8F4
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:12:13 +0100 (CET)
	id B15983E860; Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:12:12 +0100 (CET)
X-User-ID: eJwFwQkBwDAIA0BL5QsgpyXDv4TdhUEw6Qh4bGyuenpPv1GeS34xR1JuqZuWUtgJ9KM40uoHGJ0Qew==
In-Reply-To: <92bbtjhp1n4d0vc6us5terbdvrdp0vdij1@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-CA
Bytes: 4499
Lines: 47

On 2025-03-15 11:36 a.m., Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 21:42:19 +1100, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com>:
> 
> Never mind; I see you corrected your error in a later post.
> Thanks for doing so.
> 
>> On 15/03/2025 4:49 pm, Bob Casanova wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 09:19:20 -0700, the following appeared
>>> in talk.origins, posted by Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 20:13:29 +1100, the following appeared
>>>> in talk.origins, posted by MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> The measure of literalism is in the *interpretation* of the text of
>>>>> Genesis, not the quoting of it.
>>>>>
>>>> Nope; sorry. "Literalism" literally (sorry 'bout that) means
>>>> that the text is taken exactly as read; no interpretation
>>>> allowed. If it's interpreted it's not taken literally.
>>>>>
>>> No comment? OK.
>>>>
>>
>> You've misunderstood. The context was Martin inferring I was a
>> literalist because I quoted Genesis.
>>
> In this particular case, context is irrelevant; you made a
> declarative statement regarding the measure of literalism.
> That statement was incorrect; literalism allows NO
> interpretation. Stop trying to wiggle out; your were wrong.
> Admit it and move on.
>>
I'm a bit of two minds about this. The usual complaint about the misuse 
of "literal(ly)" is associated with a counter-factual. ie "I literally 
died when he said that." Clearly NOT literal. In other cases there is 
clear room  for interpretation. Language is not unambiguous. Take the 
statement "God exists". What is the literal meaning? It is not clearly 
counter-factual (even though I believe it is not true for many/most 
interpretations of 'God') It surely depends on how both 'God" and 
"exists" are defined and so interpretation is required.

-- 
--
Don Cates ("he's a cunning rascal" PN)