Why wud u accept something as true tho if there is no opposing view. I can makeup anything and say since there is no else opposing view point, my claim is the truth. I say that outside of the observable universe its all turtles. That does not make it true just because there is no other evidence of anything else. Its a debate about facts not what ifs.
This is a classic appeal to ignorance fallacy.
Because there is no opposing view from all of the evidence available.
You can choose to accept it, or say that they are liars and/or crazy. So why IMAGINE she was older? All from the time that we know of are in agreement (I know she’s referred to at least once in another Hadith, playing with dolls).
Yes, you can pretend that you have some special insight, but you don’t. “You” describing anyone who might disagree.
For example, I have a memory of when I was a child. I know what happened, and nobody else does, or everybody else who did know is dead/absent. You will call me a liar?
Why pretend that I’m lying? You have no clue. There is no evidence of anything else happening.
That’s why it’s not a debate.
If you had evidence that she was whatever age, and other people who were there disagree? Well, then you can debate based on the merits and testimony of the witnesses. But as it is, she said she was young, others who were there said she was playing with dolls. Nobody from the time is saying “No, I was there, she was in her 30s”. Her being a young child is not unusual in any way at that time.
Does this mean all testimony is fact? No. But without evidence to the contrary, any other opinion is fantasy and conjecture.
Those “someone’s” are the only ones who knew. The reason to believe them is that there IS NO ONE ELSE offering an opposing view point from that time.
You either accept it as true, or reject it as untrue (in spite of knowing absolutely nothing).
No debate at all
Why wud u accept something as true tho if there is no opposing view. I can makeup anything and say since there is no else opposing view point, my claim is the truth. I say that outside of the observable universe its all turtles. That does not make it true just because there is no other evidence of anything else. Its a debate about facts not what ifs. This is a classic appeal to ignorance fallacy.
Because there is no opposing view from all of the evidence available.
You can choose to accept it, or say that they are liars and/or crazy. So why IMAGINE she was older? All from the time that we know of are in agreement (I know she’s referred to at least once in another Hadith, playing with dolls).
Yes, you can pretend that you have some special insight, but you don’t. “You” describing anyone who might disagree.
For example, I have a memory of when I was a child. I know what happened, and nobody else does, or everybody else who did know is dead/absent. You will call me a liar?
Why pretend that I’m lying? You have no clue. There is no evidence of anything else happening.
That’s why it’s not a debate.
If you had evidence that she was whatever age, and other people who were there disagree? Well, then you can debate based on the merits and testimony of the witnesses. But as it is, she said she was young, others who were there said she was playing with dolls. Nobody from the time is saying “No, I was there, she was in her 30s”. Her being a young child is not unusual in any way at that time.
Does this mean all testimony is fact? No. But without evidence to the contrary, any other opinion is fantasy and conjecture.
So no debate.