jaej

I've heard this analogy used to describe the fallacies of religion.

Four blind men were walking in the jungle. As they walked, they came across the elephant. Wondering what it was, each man grabbed a different part of the elephant. One blind man grabbed the tail, one grabbed the leg, one an ear, and one a tusk. The blind man with the tail said (btw, all of these could describe a penis) "Hmm. Elephants must be long and stretchy." The one holding the leg said "No, an elephant must be large and round." The third said "No, elephants have got to be soft and floppy." And the one with the tusk said "Well I think elephants are hard and curved."
While each of the blind men was in fact holding part of an elephant, none of them had the whole picture. Religion is like this-many religion's have part of the truth, but none have the whole truth.

I was thinking about this, and I came across this rather obvious fallacy with that statement: one can only argue that no religion grasps the whole truth if one already knows the whole truth as absolute fact. Let me know if I need to clarify.

Thoughts??

__________________
Μολὼν Λαβέ

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

lauraclay

That's exactly my view. No one religion could possibly have it right, or it would be more widespread and successful.

jaej

I hope faith or someone like him will come and tell me how they think they can know everything. Please. I want no dogma, I don't want to hear how wrong I am and how evil I am for believing science, I just want to hear why you think you are so right.

__________________
Μολὼν Λαβέ

Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate

lauraclay

I love how you invite him to come but you know you will complain when he gets here. lol