[nZac]

Do you mean that because a book doesn't write itself, which is an impossible task, it can't be true? That seems to remove the possibility to know anything from a written text including science, history, autobiographies, and other forms of non-fiction.

[gnaritas]

Any written text can be either true or false, fiction and mythology have always been wildly popular. The bible, like all works of fiction, was made up by men.

> That seems to remove the possibility to know anything from a written text including science, history, autobiographies, and other forms of non-fiction.

Things aren't true because they're written, they're true because they can be verified as true; writing merely adds the possibility to pass on the knowledge required to verify a truth. Absent re-verification, nothing is true simply because someone wrote it down.

[cconcepts]

I've heard it described as confusion between cause and agency. Just because you know how something happened doesn't explain that thing's purpose or that it doesn't have intent.

I may have been in the Toyota factory and even met the engineers who designed the cars. That doesn't mean I understand the full intent of Toyota's board of directors.

[maroonblazer]

The Koran and Dianetics didn't write themselves either. Are they true? If not, why not?