|
Not to mention the tablets, the precious metal ruminants, the named protagonists.
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:54 |
|
|
Family Values posted:In order for you to state this so unequivocally you need to demonstrate: That's not how science works. a) A small group of Canaanites fleeing Egypt would leave very little evidence, so not finding any doesn't prove anything. They were nomads, constantly moving with no permanent structures. There were lots of groups crossing the Sinai all the time throughout history; there isn't anything that would distinguish this group from another. b) There are settlements in Canaan of what are assumed to be the proto-Hebrews. We don't know where they came from. They could very well have come from Egypt. Asserting that they definitely didn't is false based on current evidence. c) The book of Exodus written in its final form during the Captivity, but every tribe in the Hebrew Confederation had had their own version of it for centuries. It was the national epic, a piece of shared culture that bound them together. Every time it was retold (sung by an epic poet at a community festival) it was embellished and changed. We know that the final version isn't literally true, but it was never meant to be. It was an expression of Hebrew nationhood. It is not correct to infer that it was completely invented out of whole cloth just because the final version was exaggerated. It might have been, but most cultural myths are based on a historical fact. The correct answer is "we don't really know for sure." There's nothing wrong with that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
Lack of evidence that something exists is evidence that something doesn’t exist. People are allowed to make reasonable inferences based on that evidence and it may even be proof of some assertion depending on that persons standard of proof. I know you don’t agree. You don’t have to respond.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:That's not how science works. That is not the correct conclusion. The Israelites told a mythical story about their past. There is no evidence that any of it is true. Therefore it isn’t true. Hypothetical, unsubstantiated scenarios that ‘could’ explain why the myth exists count for nothing when there’s not a shred of evidence for it. Are you this way about all mythologies or just the ones in the bible? I’m getting strong vibes that this is a matter of faith for you. If you’re from the point of view that the bible is true history unless definitively proven otherwise, I guess we’re going to have to leave it there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 01:14
|
|
|
Family Values posted:That is not the correct conclusion. The Israelites told a mythical story about their past. There is no evidence that any of it is true. Therefore it isn’t true. Hypothetical, unsubstantiated scenarios that ‘could’ explain why the myth exists count for nothing when there’s not a shred of evidence for it. Again, that sort of logical positivism doesn't work in science. This isn't a philosophy class. When you don't have conclusive evidence either way, the answer is, "we don't know." I am this way about all mythologies. I try to strip away the obviously fanciful parts of them and try to figure out what the actual basis of it was. Another point is that stating anything definitive about the Exodus is completely unnecessary. Nothing in the world changes if the ancient Hebrews actually came from Egypt or not. It's perfectly OK to wait for the evidence to come in before making a judgment about it. I guess the return question is why is it so drat important to you to deny that it happened and refuse to acknowledge that it could have?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 01:22
|
|
|
But you are trying to figure it out by speculating. At best its a theory that we can't disprove and the only evidence for it is a Bible story with understandably false details.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 01:26
|
|
|
I'm on Deteriorata's side here, things can be true whether or not there's evidence. If you want to get into philosophy of science, most people believe that evidence uncovers some sort of material truth of the universe. Either there was a Hebrew band that moved from Egypt to Canaan, or there wasn't. There is some fundamental truth to the matter, and without evidence we can only say that it seems pretty unlikely that this might have happened. Unlikely things happen all the time, of course. Also, can we please not go straight to attacking motives? It's a very tiresome internet leftist thing. I know because I hang out with internet leftists almost exclusively. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
There used to be this scientist, I forget his name, who was so certaint that there was no evidence for anything pre-clovis, that there wasn't even a point in digging down further. I don't remember his name, most probably because he was wrong. But hey, there really was a lack of evidence, hence pre-clovis culture only started existing once evidence was found, despite having already been dead for 10's of thousands of years.: While a lack of evidence isn't evidence of something, it is not evidence of nothing either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
Lack of evidence that something is exists is extremely evidence that thing doesn’t exist. By the way my point was “Exodus” didn’t happen. Not “some band of Semitic people left Egypt at some point” didn’t happen. “Exodus” is a specific story with facts in it and names and poo poo and episodes etc. euphronius fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I'm on Deteriorata's side here, things can be true whether or not there's evidence. If you want to get into philosophy of science, most people believe that evidence uncovers some sort of material truth of the universe. Either there was a Hebrew band that moved from Egypt to Canaan, or there wasn't. There is some fundamental truth to the matter, and without evidence we can only say that it seems pretty unlikely that this might have happened. As I said before, you have to not only establish that this band existed, establish a physical connection between them and the people that wrote the story down, and also explain the contrary evidence that the Israelites developed in situ out of the local Canaanite cultural continuum. Why is this so important? Because there’s a long history of people claiming that biblical stories are true and putting the onus on others to disprove it. VVV History is not Physics. Family Values fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Lack of evidence that something is exists is extremely evidence that thing doesn’t exist. Not in science. Reality has its own existence independent of our ability to detect it. X-rays didn't start existing only after Roentgen discovered them. Dysprosium atoms existed in the Earth's crust before they were detected. "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence" only applies when you can thoroughly define a system and categorically state that property X must be detected if such a thing exists. That isn't true very often in science. I can't prove that unicorns don't exist. I can prove that there are no unicorns in my garage, but I cannot extrapolate from that that no unicorns could possibly exist anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:01
|
|
|
You are conflating proof and evidence again The fact that there is no evidence of unicorns in your garage is evidence they don’t exist
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
Wait are you just copying the proof of Atlantis posts and doing a word replace
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:04
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Not in science. Reality has its own existence independent of our ability to detect it. Unicorns can cast invisibility. Just cause you can’t see them doesn’t mean it’s not rearranging your tool collection.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
I've always liked the idea that the original Hebrews were climate refugees from an area that is now totally subsumed into the Sahara but there's no drat evidence for it.
Teriyaki Hairpiece fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Unicorns can cast invisibility. Only the pink ones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:42
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Only the pink ones. Prove it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Lack of evidence that something exists is evidence that something doesn’t exist. People are allowed to make reasonable inferences based on that evidence and it may even be proof of some assertion depending on that persons standard of proof. A written record of a supposed historical event is evidence, though - weak evidence when the record itself could have been written much later that the supposed event, but it's not a complete lack of evidence. I'm not saying there was a historical Exodus (and I believe that the consensus among historians is that there probably wasn't one), but it's not inherently ludicrous, either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:A written record of a supposed historical event is evidence, though - weak evidence when the record itself could have been written much later that the supposed event, but it's not a complete lack of evidence. Fair enough. That is true. I guess I should have said there is no evidence (other than the work itself).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
Just out of curiosity, if there was to be such evidence. What would it be? genuinely curious as to what would be considered evidence of the exodus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 03:54
|
|
|
Dalael posted:Just out of curiosity, if there was to be such evidence. What would it be? genuinely curious as to what would be considered evidence of the exodus. Written egyptian sources would be the obvious one. Or written sources from anywhere really as long as it was contemporary and not half a millennium later
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
An Egyptian written account of a tribe of Canaanites being in Egypt and then leaving. Physical remains of a tribe of Canaanites in the Sinai at roughly the right timeframe (even assuming the 40 years in the wilderness thing is later mythologizing you would still expect campsites, trash middens, etc.) Egyptianized Cannaanites in the Levant (i.e. some sort of mixed material culture with a recognizable connection with Egypt that predates or coincides with proto-Israelites). All of which have been looked for for centuries by all manner of archeologists, adventurers, and treasure hunters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
Troy was a fantasy until they dug a hill in Turkey up
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 04:48
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Lack of evidence that something is exists is extremely evidence that thing doesn’t exist. uh. . . I don't think this actually makes sense from a philosophy of science perspective I don't really know much about this subject, but euphronius and Family Values, it really sounds like you guys are butchering good scientific and historical methods. You might want to go back and reread your Popper because the things you are saying are not making sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 05:37
|
|
|
Family Values posted:An Egyptian written account of a tribe of Canaanites being in Egypt and then leaving. Physical remains of a tribe of Canaanites in the Sinai at roughly the right timeframe (even assuming the 40 years in the wilderness thing is later mythologizing you would still expect campsites, trash middens, etc.) Egyptianized Cannaanites in the Levant (i.e. some sort of mixed material culture with a recognizable connection with Egypt that predates or coincides with proto-Israelites). How much of the archaeological record do you think has actually been dealt with rigorously? Telsa Cola fucked around with this message at 06:36 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 06:28
|
|
|
skasion posted:Here’s the thing, the Egyptians knew where the Israelites were around the time of the Bronze Age collapse. It was in Egyptian-dominated Canaan with the other Canaanites, busy getting laid waste by Merneptah, according to his stele. On this stele they also used a determinative for Israel which is normally used for nomadic peoples. There's a lecture recently held at The Oriental Institute in Chicago about ancient Israel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1FnyQgFNBE Grevling fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
Why is Babylon thought of as a big deal? From what I've read it was an above average kingdom under Hammurabi and then got owned repeatedly by Elamites, Hittites and Assyrians for a millennium. Why is Babylon more "well-known"? Is it the bible? Proximity to Baghdad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 08:44
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:That's not how science works. The story isn’t that there was a small group walking through the desert. There was a large group hanging out there for forty years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 09:07
|
|
|
Just to fan the flames this site makes a decently coherent argument that it might have been the hebrew tribe/priesthood class of levi that was somehow an import from Egypt. With the main arguments being that many levite names are seemingly egyptian, the levites being the ones who introduce a specifc name for the god instead of the earlier more generic title and some other things like only the levites mentioning the importance of kindness to forigners and some omissions of them in old listings of "tribes of Israel". Naturally this is almost exclusively based on torahic scripture so massive bias and mountains of salt etc. Previosly I have only heard this in conjunction with some hebrew names like Miriam possibly being of egyptian origin and having the root of mry amun/loved by Amun etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 09:42
|
|
|
Morholt posted:Why is Babylon thought of as a big deal? From what I've read it was an above average kingdom under Hammurabi and then got owned repeatedly by Elamites, Hittites and Assyrians for a millennium. Why is Babylon more "well-known"? Is it the bible? Proximity to Baghdad? I feel like the discovery of the Code of Hammurabi has to feature largely in this in modern times. That plus all the existing clout from loving up Solomon's Temple in the bible and Hellenic hype for the Hanging Gardens maybe?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 09:43
|
|
|
Morholt posted:Why is Babylon thought of as a big deal? From what I've read it was an above average kingdom under Hammurabi and then got owned repeatedly by Elamites, Hittites and Assyrians for a millennium. Why is Babylon more "well-known"? Is it the bible? Proximity to Baghdad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
Squalid posted:uh. . . I don't think this actually makes sense from a philosophy of science perspective I’m not terribly interested in Austrian school guys so if you could point out generally what you are thinking about wrt to popper that would be helpful. Your reference to popper is pretty confusing basically
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:06
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I’m not terribly interested in Austrian school guys so if you could point out generally what you are thinking about wrt to popper that would be helpful. Karl Popper. Wrote extensively on the philosophy of science. Generally considered to be extremely approachable even as an entry level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:15
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Karl Popper. Wrote extensively on the philosophy of science. Generally considered to be extremely approachable even as an entry level. I know who he is for fucks sake The guy wrote popper contradicts what I wrote. I am not going to go read popper (again) to support his argument that I’m wrong. I’m politely asking for a more specific citation than “popper” Popper said a lot of things
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:16
|
|
|
The Coles notes version of popper here would be that none of the factors you cite can refute the conjecture that there was a historical basis for Exodus. If there is no evidence that it happened, logically speaking you can't say that it definitely did not happen. The most you can say is "there is no evidence that it happened" and then offer an alternative model or explanation for events based on the evidence that you have. Since in history - especially stuff like bronze age history which is so far back that evidence is extremely thin - it's very hard to demonstrate a mutual exclusivity, it's good practice to stay with "no evidence".
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I’m not terribly interested in Austrian school guys so if you could point out generally what you are thinking about wrt to popper that would be helpful. Lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:44
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:
You are conflating evidence and proof. Again. Like the third person to do so. I clearly never said the absence of evidence that something exists is necessarily proof it doesn’t exist. My statement “absence of evidence that something exists is evidence that is doesn’t exist” cannot be refuted. It’s fundamental to the definition of the words.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:51
|
|
|
euphronius posted:You are conflating evidence and proof. Again. Like the third person to do so. I clearly never said the absence of evidence that something exists is necessarily proof it doesn’t exist. Ok then, be wrong. Just shut up about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Love to read epistemological slap fights 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 14:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:54 |
|
|
euphronius posted:You are conflating evidence and proof. Again. Like the third person to do so. I clearly never said the absence of evidence that something exists is necessarily proof it doesn’t exist. Yes but I think people have been pointing out that its a meaningless statement.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 15:10
|
|