Chronological snobbery, a term coined by friends C. S. Lewis and Owen Barfield, is a logical argument (and usually when thus termed, considered an outright fallacy) describing the erroneous argument that the thinking, art, or science of an earlier time is inherently inferior when compared to that of the present.
.........................
Pattern
The form of the chronological snobbery fallacy can be expressed as follows:
_____________________________________________________________________
1. The Bible is an old book, and so is outdated and not applicable for modern society.
I once heard this classic answer to this: The sun is very old as well, but its light and heat is still fresh every morning. And, someone else replied, "What about oxygen? It is an old thing as well!"
2. The modern scientific world cannot accept the postulates of the Biblical "mythical" world. Rudolf Bultmann tried to reshape theology to suit what he considered to be modernity, because he thought that the Biblical world was completely different from our present world. Is it? Has human nature changed any bit? He denied the Virgin Birth, the historical relevance of Jesus, and the resurrection of Christ. He said that we live in an age when people no longer believe in demons and spirits. Well, that is not at all true. The science of Bultmann's day or place may not have thought of these; but the American Society for Psychical Research had already been documenting evidences on this line. Of course, the demons have been driving human minds to several false conclusions; but, Bultmann's attempt towards demythologizing just on the hypothesis of a modern world of science, was certainly too presumptuous. It was like a frog in a well thinking that the well was all the world of experience that was possible, and every other example of experience was a myth. And, now there are undeniable proofs for the historicity of Jesus and existential proofs for the resurrection of Christ (If He had not resurrected, why would the apostles be willing to be martyred, as were 11 of them, for a purportedly false message?).
Chronological snobbery is attitudinally colored. The child thinks that he doesn't need to listen to the father anymore, because he knows better. The old mind-set is false, he thinks; and so, there is rebellion and disobedience. But, what comes after is not necessarily better and truer than what came earlier. Such is only the delusion of evolutionary thinking. There are some basic truths that can never be changed. We still need food, water, and air. We still need God and His Word. Anything else is only suicidal.
.........................
Pattern
The form of the chronological snobbery fallacy can be expressed as follows:
- It is argued that A implies B.
- A implies B is an old argument, dating back to the times when people also believed C.
- C is clearly false.
- Therefore, A does not imply B.
_____________________________________________________________________
Examples of chronological snobbery used against Christianity:
1. The Bible is an old book, and so is outdated and not applicable for modern society.
I once heard this classic answer to this: The sun is very old as well, but its light and heat is still fresh every morning. And, someone else replied, "What about oxygen? It is an old thing as well!"
2. The modern scientific world cannot accept the postulates of the Biblical "mythical" world. Rudolf Bultmann tried to reshape theology to suit what he considered to be modernity, because he thought that the Biblical world was completely different from our present world. Is it? Has human nature changed any bit? He denied the Virgin Birth, the historical relevance of Jesus, and the resurrection of Christ. He said that we live in an age when people no longer believe in demons and spirits. Well, that is not at all true. The science of Bultmann's day or place may not have thought of these; but the American Society for Psychical Research had already been documenting evidences on this line. Of course, the demons have been driving human minds to several false conclusions; but, Bultmann's attempt towards demythologizing just on the hypothesis of a modern world of science, was certainly too presumptuous. It was like a frog in a well thinking that the well was all the world of experience that was possible, and every other example of experience was a myth. And, now there are undeniable proofs for the historicity of Jesus and existential proofs for the resurrection of Christ (If He had not resurrected, why would the apostles be willing to be martyred, as were 11 of them, for a purportedly false message?).
Chronological snobbery is attitudinally colored. The child thinks that he doesn't need to listen to the father anymore, because he knows better. The old mind-set is false, he thinks; and so, there is rebellion and disobedience. But, what comes after is not necessarily better and truer than what came earlier. Such is only the delusion of evolutionary thinking. There are some basic truths that can never be changed. We still need food, water, and air. We still need God and His Word. Anything else is only suicidal.
Comments
Post a Comment