5/31/24
Scholarly Reflections
Koukl, Gregory. (2019). "Chapter Fifteen: Rhodes Scholar." In Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions (updated and expanded). (pp. 202-211). Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Koukl describes newspaper and magazine articles, typically published right before Christmas and Easter, which attempt to tell of some sort of "untold" story which their scholarly experts know but which ahs been hidden from the general public (Koukl 2019, p. 202). To deal well with such claims, it may be useful to distinguish between what a scholar believes and why he believesr it. Koukl calls his tool for finding the distinction and an explanation the Rhodes Scholar approach.
To apply the Rhodes Scholar approach, ask for reasons why the person has reached his conclusion (Koukl 2019, p. 203). To do so simply verifies a reason to believe the person's opinion. There may be very good reasons, but often the reasoning is lacking in some important details. Statements are frequently outside of the expert's area of expertise. Koukl gives as an example Nobel laureates in biology and chemistry commenting on the positive economic effect of a legislative proposal which had strong ethical issues attached to it.
Koukl observes that a scholar's judgement or opinion within his field of expertise may be clouded by other considerations, making it less likely that the analysis will be accurate (Koukl 2019, p. 204-205).
The confusion in evaluating expert opinions is frequently increased by use of vague terms. As an example, Koukl quotes "Intelligent design is not science" (Koukl 2019, p. 205). "Science" may refer either to the methodology in use or to the philosophical presupposition of materialism. Investigation of origin and development of life may include a step which is not based on a wholly materialist and naturalist worldview. Those possibilities are often discounted immediatly as not being scientific (Koukl 2019, p. 206). The goal of "science" is often to preserve its philosophical presuppositions.
Koukl returns to the them from the start of the chapter, noting that often the experts who make claims of a special hidden understanidng of Jesus are trying to make those claims based on their view of science (Koukl 2019, p. 208). The presupposition of a naturalistic, materialistic world rejects any claims to resurrection or other miracles described in the Bible. The underlying assumptions govern the conclusions (Koukl 2019, p. 209).
Koukl asks if the charge of presuppositions can be used against Christians (Koukl 2019, p. 210). It can. However, a bias or presupposition is not the problem. A bias which distorts the view of evidence is a problem. The bias of accepting a possibility of supernatural intervention allows for fair consideration of all types of phenomena, so does not necessarily distort an evaluation.
Scholarly Reflections
Koukl, Gregory. (2019). "Chapter Fifteen: Rhodes Scholar." In Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions (updated and expanded). (pp. 202-211). Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Koukl describes newspaper and magazine articles, typically published right before Christmas and Easter, which attempt to tell of some sort of "untold" story which their scholarly experts know but which ahs been hidden from the general public (Koukl 2019, p. 202). To deal well with such claims, it may be useful to distinguish between what a scholar believes and why he believesr it. Koukl calls his tool for finding the distinction and an explanation the Rhodes Scholar approach.
To apply the Rhodes Scholar approach, ask for reasons why the person has reached his conclusion (Koukl 2019, p. 203). To do so simply verifies a reason to believe the person's opinion. There may be very good reasons, but often the reasoning is lacking in some important details. Statements are frequently outside of the expert's area of expertise. Koukl gives as an example Nobel laureates in biology and chemistry commenting on the positive economic effect of a legislative proposal which had strong ethical issues attached to it.
Koukl observes that a scholar's judgement or opinion within his field of expertise may be clouded by other considerations, making it less likely that the analysis will be accurate (Koukl 2019, p. 204-205).
The confusion in evaluating expert opinions is frequently increased by use of vague terms. As an example, Koukl quotes "Intelligent design is not science" (Koukl 2019, p. 205). "Science" may refer either to the methodology in use or to the philosophical presupposition of materialism. Investigation of origin and development of life may include a step which is not based on a wholly materialist and naturalist worldview. Those possibilities are often discounted immediatly as not being scientific (Koukl 2019, p. 206). The goal of "science" is often to preserve its philosophical presuppositions.
Koukl returns to the them from the start of the chapter, noting that often the experts who make claims of a special hidden understanidng of Jesus are trying to make those claims based on their view of science (Koukl 2019, p. 208). The presupposition of a naturalistic, materialistic world rejects any claims to resurrection or other miracles described in the Bible. The underlying assumptions govern the conclusions (Koukl 2019, p. 209).
Koukl asks if the charge of presuppositions can be used against Christians (Koukl 2019, p. 210). It can. However, a bias or presupposition is not the problem. A bias which distorts the view of evidence is a problem. The bias of accepting a possibility of supernatural intervention allows for fair consideration of all types of phenomena, so does not necessarily distort an evaluation.
RSS Feed