Pakikinig sa Katwiran ng Kausap sa Apologetics, Part 3 of 3 || John Pesebre (May 3, 2018)

In the previous episode tinalakay ko po yung first question sa first H ng 4H apologetics: “What is the claim of the argument?” Kung matatandaan ninyo, an argument has two parts: a claim and a support. Tinalakay ko din the previous episodes, kung ano ang three types of claims: claim of fact, claim of value at claim of policy. Tandaan natin na ang first H is Hear, so makikinig ka. Ngayong episode, andudun pa rin tayo sa first H na ‘yon na Hear pero ang concern naman natin ngayon is to know the support of the claim, ulitin ko po: to know the support of the claim. In other words, kailangan mo dito malaman ang kaniyang substantiation sa kaniyang assertions.

You may know this by asking honest questions based on Greg Koukl’s book Tactics as summarized here by GraceLead —

First inquiring question: “What do you mean by that?”

Use variations of this question to gather information. Your tone should be mild and inquisitive. Make an effort to understand WHAT the person means. (Sometimes people have not thought through the issues.) Be patient. Use questions to help the person state his views specifically instead of in vague generalities.

The second inquiring question is, “How did you come to that conclusion?”

Use this type of question to find out WHY the person believes what he believes. Opinions are not proofs. Whoever makes the claim is responsible for providing the proof. An assertion without evidence is not useful.

Ang ginagawa mo dito ay ginagawan mo ng pattern ang reasoning niya. Kailangan kasi magkaroon ng manageability ang argument niya sa’yo. So sa dalawang tanong na yan based kay Koukl, your goal is simply to know a person’s CLAIM and to the understand the SUPPORT to the person’s claim.

It wouldn't be an argument if he just claims something. The argument must have a support -- a substantiation of the assertion about reality. Finding out etong argument na ito is crucial kasi this provides you the foundation of the doubt.  Support answers the question, "What reason do you have for me to believe your claim is true and real?" yan ang tanong.

"Argument requires justification of its claims, is both a product and a process, and it combines elements of truth seeking and persuasion," according to Ramage et al, in Writing Arguments.
If we are in this mindset, we are now in a good place to be trained in to identify an argument.

Taking time to listen will give you deeper understanding and learning from the reasoning of other people. James Hoskins concludes in his fine blog over at the Christ & Pop Culture website these statements,

[T]he most valuable thing I learned from my philosophy professors—besides how to think critically—is something they did not intend to teach me. Through my interactions with them, I learned first hand that the Christian doctrine of common grace is absolutely true. God has revealed some truth to every person. Therefore, we can learn something from everyone; even people who believe the opposite of what we do. Thinking we can’t learn something from unbelievers not only causes us to miss out on some deeply enriching relationships, it also ensures we won’t learn anything.‡

Ang support ng claim is the reason for the claim. Sa characterization last time nung isang Christian na college student na “Christianity is a bloodthirsty religion” ano ang support niya? Here it is again –

Nahihirapan akong ireconcile yung idea na ang Diyos ay mapagmahal subalit majority ng giyera sa kasaysayan natin ay sinimulan ng mga Christians. Bakit ganon? Di ba dapat ang Christians pa ang promotor ng katahimikan, bakit ang Kristiyanismo pa ang nagpasimula ng majority ng mga giyera sa kasaysayan?

Obviously ang support niya ay “dahil majority ng gyera sa mundo ay sinimulan ng Christianity.” So ngayon ang full argument niya is this: Christianity is a bloodthirsty religion because she started majority of the wars of history.”

At this point hindi ka muna sasagot dahil tandaan mo, you are building an environment na hiyang para sa pagsasaliksik. Maganda muna mag disarm ka ng kausap mo. Lagi mong tatandaan yung Montaigne Rule: “submit yourself to the force of reasoning ng kausap mo.” So at this point, you have to remember two things: provenance at problem. Provenance simply means yung record ng pinanggalingan ng idea na ito. Ang problem naman is ‘yung legitimate na allegation ng objection ng kausap mo na dapat mong irecognize din.

Sa dalawang letter P na ito, what you are trying to establish is intellectual humility, impartiality and open-mindedness. This is your witness that God has trained your mind na maging makadiyos at mapanuri.

Sa provenance, magsasalaysay ka lang ng iyong previous knowledge of the argument. Sa kaso ng objection nung Christian college students sa taas, I would say that the idea of “Christianity is an immoral religion because she started majority of the wars of history” has been a standing objection that would reference ‘yung Crusades, mga battles sa Inquisition, Thirty Years War na kumitil ng 8 million na tao sa Europe was a war between Protestants and Roman Catholics at yung Taiping Rebellion na 20M naman ang namatay.

These are true facts by the way. It is embarrassing but it is the truth. There is nothing wrong to express your honesty in what you know about the argument. But you mention them sa conversation to set up an environment na congenial for inquiry.

So depende sa alam mo sa nature ng objection, you can add some more.

Now ang susunod na witness mo ng intellectual virtue is sa second P, Problem. Here you have to be honest of the effect of say The Thirty Years War and Taiping Rebellion sa perception ng mga tao about the Christian religion. It is wouldn’t be very difficult for me to admit that wars like this really provide good support to the objection or the argument. They are forever etched in the history of Christianity.

Malakas ang witnessing sa Hear, at ang iwi-witness mo sa kausap mo ay isang isipan na makadiyos at mapanuri. I hope you are also confident that this is your mind when you studying God’s word para naman hindi rin maging ploy lang ang iyong witness. Balikan mo ‘yung dalawang previous episodes natin na “Mga Disposisyon ng Makadiyos at Mapanuring Isipan sa Apologetics” both part 1 at part 2.

Also let me remind you na wala ding assurance na ‘yung kausap mo ay sasama sa’yo sa congenial environment na sinisikap mong akayin siya papunta. Marahil dahil ito sa matagal na niyang katanungan ito o gayunpaman marami pang mga added supports na hindi pa niya nasasabi. Ganun pa man nawa’y wag kang panghinaan ng loob and you have to return to your motive. Look up the previous episodes on faith, hope and love as motives for apologetics to help put things in perspective for you at hindi ka panghinaan at ma frustrate.