Posted: Jul 16, 2018 9:48 pm
I can see a statement that "there can be no reason for freedom, equality or justice, other than the hopeful reality of God". I cannot see an argument for it. Those things are different.
For example: Suppose I would argue for continued membership of Britain in the European Union, I would present reasons that it would benefit Britain to do so, I would suggest facts, which indicate that continued membership was beneficial and chains of inference connecting those facts to what I expect to happen in the event of remaining. There is nothing similar in the third or fourth paragraphs. There are no obstacles for the sceptical observer to overcome, no points to counter, no objections to consider.
James merely doesn't think it is the case, he never informs us why.
For example: Suppose I would argue for continued membership of Britain in the European Union, I would present reasons that it would benefit Britain to do so, I would suggest facts, which indicate that continued membership was beneficial and chains of inference connecting those facts to what I expect to happen in the event of remaining. There is nothing similar in the third or fourth paragraphs. There are no obstacles for the sceptical observer to overcome, no points to counter, no objections to consider.
James merely doesn't think it is the case, he never informs us why.