The Plausibility Problem: The Church And Same-Sex Attraction

Product Information

However, we did not see a reflection of research and modeling that involved sensemaking. In all of the papers we reviewed in these three categories, only one mentioned causal inference– Lombardi et al. (2016a) raised the issue of physical mechanisms, which seemed to imply causality–but that was only a brief and passing mention. Connell and Keane (2004) alluded to causal factors in their discussion of prior knowledge as they studied the way subjects made plausibility judgments of textual material–sentence pairs. T. del Soldato. Motivation in tutoring systems. Technical Report CSRP 303, School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of Sussex, 1994. In this personal and emotionally honest book, we’re invited to listen to Ed’s story as someone whose primary identity is in Christ, and who finds himself attracted to other men. Ed explores the plausibility problem – the missteps in current Christian approaches to homosexuality – and challenges Christians to form more biblical communities in which celibate, same-sex attracted people can flourish. - The Rt Revd Tim Dakin Few of us need reminding that issues of human sexuality have become increasingly political. From the legalisation of gay marriage without an electoral mandate, to the Church of England’s increasingly open attitude to same-sex relationships in church. All of us however need to remember that this is not simply a divisive political issue—it is a deeply personal one. Of the numerous books published recently on the church and same-sex attraction, this is the most helpful both in its fidelity to Scripture, and its personal pastoral sensitivity.

The Prior Probability is the likelihood, prior to beginning the study, that our premise is true. Prior Probability is a quantitative assessment of plausibility. Like sensitivity and specificity, prior probability can be expressed as a number between 0 and 1. A prior probability of 0 means that there is zero chance that the premise is true. A prior probability of 1 means that the truth of the premise is a certainty. In our table, we can display prior probability as the relative widths of the columns labeled “Treatment effective” and “Treatment ineffective” Weekes, Robin. Review of Ed Shaw, The Plausibility Problem: The Church and Same–Sex Attraction (Nottingham: IVP, 2015). Churchman 129/2 (2015): 189–191. Abendroth and Richter (2020) presented an information processing account of plausibility. They considered the importance of plausibility judgments in identifying fake news–information on social media that is accidentally or, most commonly, deliberately false. The study suggested that when individuals are presented with a plausible explanation for an unfamiliar scientific phenomenon, their comprehension of the topic improves. Abendroth and Richter (2020) argued that people are more likely to accept and retain information that is presented in a plausible manner, as it aligns with their existing knowledge and beliefs. The results highlighted the importance of making scientific information accessible and plausible for the public to enhance their understanding and engagement with science. Our account is consistent with Kahneman and Miller’s (1986) presentation on norm theory and the recruitment of exemplars to judge typicality. Leverage point identification You know what the Bible teaches about same-sex attraction, but it isn't realistic, is it? If that's what you're thinking then this book is for you.

References

GK, developed the plausibility transition model, selected and reviewed the cases, wrote the initial draft, and completed the final draft of the manuscript. MJ conducted the literature review, prepared the analysis of the articles that were selected for further examination, and assisted in the editing of the manuscript. RH provided critiques and suggestions for the plausibility transition model, identified additional literature for inclusion in the manuscript, and made numerous editorial recommendations on the manuscript. SM provided valuable recommendations on the plausibility transition model from the very inception of the model. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version. Funding Lets start with a very basic study design. We are exploring a new treatment for disease X. We would consider the study positive, if the treatments is associated with improved outcomes at some pre-specified level of statistical significance. Ease of imagining the state transitions. This ease of imagining, which is related to the availability heuristic identified by Tversky and Kahneman (1974) is a subjective and emotional judgment that the causal factors in the precursor state are sufficient to account for the subsequent state. This judgment depends heavily on the sophistication of the person’s mental model of causes.

Existing accounts of plausibility judgments seem incomplete: they emphasize logical analyses, scrutiny of the credibility of sources, and so forth, all of which are important, but fail to consider plausibility judgments as a form of sensemaking.If the answer is yes (post-published data must be disregarded if the proof of the effect rests exclusively on these data): can post-published data be taken into consideration if based on the information in the patent application the skilled person at the relevant date would have considered the effect plausible (ab initio plausibility)? Now lets look into the study details that can influence the relative likelihood of the 4 outcomes: TP, FN, FP, and TN. Ed Shaw experiences same-sex attraction, and yet he is committed to what the Bible says and what the church has always taught about marriage and sex. In this honest book, he shares his pain in dealing with these issues - but, at the same time, shows us that obedience to Jesus is ultimately the only way to experience life to the full.

As a Christian who also knows same-sex desire first-hand, I would put a few things differently from how Ed Shaw does here. But that doesn’t stop me from applauding this biblically thorough, evangelistically zealous, humbly self-disclosing, and pastorally compassionate defence of traditional Christian sexual ethics. Ed Shaw’s life and teaching are an inspiring variation on what the church throughout history has celebrated as consecrated, holy virginity. May his tribe increase! - Wesley Hill, author of Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and HomosexualityThis book gives a clear explanation of what the Bible says on this topic. It also gives a very honest and vulnerable personal account of one man's experience of this issue. Sinatra and Lombardi (2020) argued that people detect fake news by assessing the credibility of the source and appraising lines of evidence, along with comparisons to alternatives and probabilistic reasoning. For Sinatra and Lombardi (2020), plausibility judgments are essential for identifying fake news by relying on individuals’ subjective perception of potential truthfulness of statements. How well does an item of information conform with a reader’s prior knowledge, beliefs, or current understanding of a situation? They argued that people detect fake news by assessing the credibility of the source and appraising lines of evidence, along with comparisons to alternatives and probabilistic reasoning. The article explained that in the post-truth era, where people are often bombarded with misinformation and false claims, it’s crucial to reappraise the way we evaluate sources of scientific evidence and claims. Sinatra and Lombardi (2020) suggest that people’s judgment of what is plausible is often influenced by factors such as emotions, biases, and previous experiences. This can lead to acceptance of false information as truth and undermine the credibility of scientific evidence. If the answer to the first question is yes (post-published data must be disregarded if the proof of the effect rests exclusively on these data): can post-published data be taken into consideration if based on the information in the patent application the skilled person at the relevant date would have seen no reason to consider the effect implausible (ab initio implausibility)? Maguire et al. (2011) and Foster and Keane (2015) described the judgment of surprisingness in terms of sensemaking difficulty. The sensemaking accounts of surprise and explanation form the basis of our description of plausibility judgments, as discussed in subsequent sections. However, with the exception of the work by Klein et al. (2006a, b, 2007), none of the other sensemaking investigations adopted a naturalistic perspective–they relied on a laboratory paradigm, and tightly constrained stimuli such as short passages crafted to increase or decrease plausibility. Here is one of the stimulus sets used by Foster and Keane (2015), the Rebecca at the Beach scenario. Story-building process. Our approach views plausibility judgments as the attempt to construct a story, a narrative, to explain the phenomenon of interest.

The book also challenges the whole church to change, pointing out many ways in which we have been led into false assumptions in our largely comfortable lives. These "missteps" include: "A family is Mum, Dad and 2.4 children", "If it makes you happy, it must be right", "Sex is where true intimacy is found", "Celibacy is bad for you" and "Suffering is to be avoided." The church throughout history has known well that these statements cause assumptions; the modern church is in real danger of forgetting. Shaw also includes "If you are born gay, it can't be wrong to be gay", and "Your identity is your sexuality", which are much more specific and modern problems, which the whole church needs to be empowered to resist.

Summary of The Plausibility Problem

Shaw fills the book with examples of the issues facing same-sex attracted people, and most of all those affecting the author: loneliness, recurrent temptation as attractive men pass by, abandonment by others - even some Christians - who tell you that gay sex isn't wrong, the feeling that you are increasingly unable to communicate with your married friends who are putting their nuclear family far higher in priority than their church family, and that you are being left out of the “most important” thing in life. It is more common for researchers to talk about the false positive rate rather than the specificity. Researchers usually refer to the critical P-value rather than the Specificity. P-value and specificity convey exactly the same information, and can readily be derived from one-another. Specificity = 1 – P S. Puntambekar and B. du Boulay. Design and development of MIST-a system to help students develop metacognition. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(1):1–35, 1997. The move towards the arguments about celibacy and suffering was carefully followed as the essential argument of his position is reached. Jesus is enough! More than enough! My usual pattern of reading is to leave the Appendices until last – and then only for a skim reading – but I would suggest that the serious groundwork of the interpretation of scripture in the Appendices could be read first before getting into the book ‘proper’. Now we have done our study, and analyzed the results. We have achieved our target P value of .05. What then is the likelihood that this positive study is a true positive? Since our P value is .05, we can be 95% sure that our study is correct, right? WRONG! Remember, the P value tells us something about the False Positives. The P value alone tells us nothing about the chances of a True Positive result! This is a very critical concept, and one that is poorly understood by many people.