[Synoptic-L] The falsifiability of Juggernauts (was: "Is Q ...")
- Mike MacDonnell wrote:
>(1) Q is not falsifiable.
>(2) Since Q is not falsifiable, 3SH (as well as any other "hypothesis" that
>depends on Q) is not falsifiable.
Sorry, there's a logical flaw in this argument.
If hypothesis X makes assertions A and B, where A is falsifiable and B
is not, then it follows that X is falsifiable because falsifying A is
enough to falsify X.
The 2SH and the 3SH , in addition to positing forms of Q, assert that
Au_Matt made use of Mark and Au_Luke made use of Mark. These latter two
assertions have nothing to do with hypothetical documents. Therefore the
2SH and the 3SH are falsifiable in the same way that the Farrer
Hypothesis is falsifiable.
Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK
Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm