200
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 64:
Line 64: + +
→Rewrite: Claims and evidence are not synonymous
::::::: The very fact that we have the capability of singing would support the idea that music was "invented" in heaven, making the claim entirely plausible.
::::::: The very fact that we have the capability of singing would support the idea that music was "invented" in heaven, making the claim entirely plausible.
::::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:26, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
::::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:26, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
(undent) If another source was found which claimed, independently, that music started in heaven, it would not count as evidence in favour of the first claim. Consider a counter-example: if a man is accused of murder by another man, the police would start to investigate the claim by looking for evidence. If a second person came forward and also accused him of murder, it would not change anything: the police might have greater cause to take the claim seriously, but they would still need to find evidence before they could proceed any further. Even if ten or twenty or a hundred people unanimously accused the man of murder, his guilt could not be proven or disproven unless there was evidence which supported their accusations.
Regarding our capability to sing, I do not follow your reasoning. The fact that humans can sing does not in itself suggest anything about music's origins. We can also run, hunt, build tools, swim, have sexual intercourse... Does it follow that, since humans can do these things, they too were started in heaven? [[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 13:20, 7 May 2008 (EDT)