Jesus Before Constantine. Doug E. Taylor

Jesus Before Constantine - Doug E. Taylor


Скачать книгу
using root cause methodology for assessing gaps or failures focuses on evidence rather than speculation and is commonly used by major corporations and government agencies in the United States,11 the objectivity of the system has been well established in the secular community. No known works prior to this have sought to evaluate the differences in Christian teachings during this time span through the use of root cause analysis.

      It is important for now to note that the use of root cause analysis is not merely “a business tool.” Rather it is a method for investigating historical conditions and events related to why virtually any undesired event happened. Speculation may be avoided but is not always completely preventable, and this method does address the inclusion of speculation in the course of an investigation. When speculation enters the investigation, the conclusions become more tentative. Because this research seeks to investigate historical events, ranges of plausibility are to be preferred in assessing offered root causes and interpretation of data rather than mathematical probabilities.

      Equally important is that root cause analysis is designed to determine why a deviation or failure occurred and cannot be used as a tool to affirm why something happened correctly—a positive outcome—according to the established expectation. As such the role of root cause analysis in this research will be to aid in demonstrating not only objectivity with respect to the research, but also to assist in building a cogent argument that increases the plausibility of any offered conclusions.

      Rationale

      This work will employ both inductive and abductive approaches of argumentation, building from specific points of evidence to the best possible inferred conclusion. David Hume expressed concern over the use of the inductive method, and that concern must be addressed if the approach and conclusions are to be considered valid. The two issues associated with the Humean problem of induction in particular are with the concept of generalizing about the properties of a group of objects and presupposing that future events will happen as in the past. This work focuses on establishing a SPAC based on one specific individual rather than a collective and second, because of the definition used in determining what will constitute “evidence,” future events are not admissible for consideration. As a result, the problem of induction is avoided by focusing the research on the evidence.

      Frederick Ferré notes the following regarding the nature of evidence:

      Thomas Kelly notes the following:

      The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy frames evidence as follows:

      From an empiricist viewpoint evidence is presented as being objective in nature and known through one or more of the five senses. The skeptic’s position of our knowledge not favoring one’s ordinary and commonsense views about our surroundings over various alternatives fails to convince. If, as suggested by the skeptic, there is no reason to favor the commonsense views, then one is at a loss for explaining why such a person when driving a vehicle stops when the traffic light turns red or chooses to use an umbrella when it rains.

      Of importance here is not to claim future events as being evidential. John Hick proposed that eschatology could be used as part of an evidential argument.

      In denying the use of what may be in the future and appealing only to that which exists now or in the past, an evidential method avoids challenges that the structure is logically fallacious by way of introducing statements that may be interpreted as appealing to a hypothesis contrary to fact.

      A significant benefit to the use of an evidential method is that it has the ability to become a positive apologetic that focuses on individual points building from the data to the conclusion. A pitfall that may be avoided by the use of evidential methods is that it may prevent movement toward polemical arguments and instead focuses on the data and subsequent conclusion.


Скачать книгу