↪gevgala
Having sidetracked the thread with the Dickinson poem, I should comment on your OP. My spontaneous response is - yes, so what? Are you preaching to believers, trying to shake their faith? You're not really putting forward a philosophical argument. Sure, the quest for knowledge of the divine, if I could put it that way, operates by different standards to empirical science and peer-reviewed journal articles. But there are domains of discourse, communities of faith, within which that quest is intelligible, and which contain those quite capable of judging whether an aspirant is progressing or not. — Wayfarer

Since "God" questions are very common on this forum, it's clear that the ultimate notion of "deity" is not yet dead among philosophical thinkers, even though the savage sword of doubt is aggressively wielded against the retreating shield of faith. Consequently, I would expect TPF to be a "domain of discourse" for topics that don't conform to "different standards of empirical science". Yet, some dedicated anti-theists are still trying to drive a physical Science stake into the heart of an immortal metaphysical faith, that just won't die a natural death. It's the undying hope of Philosophers, that Mother Nature is, in some sense, rational & directional rather than random & aimless.

Apparently, for many of us wisdom lovers, "Better an ignis fatuus ; Than no illume at all". Yet, Compared to tangible Empirical evidence, fleshless Philosophical arguments are will-o-wisps that provide only ineffectual ethereal illumination. So, why bother? Why not just accept that the omnipotent hand of God, has been amputated? Why not substitute faith in all-powerful Technology for the impotent absent God? I can think of only one reason for a god-like answer to Ontological & Epistemological questions : the unknowable abyss of "Why", that remains after all "How" questions have been turned into high-tech.

Nature was long presumed to be God's hand, working in the world. But now Culture has extended the reach of the human hand beyond natural bounds. Unfortunately, Phusis has always been indifferent to human needs & desires, despite prayers & sacrifices. So, we turn to Technology to grant our individual wishes, all-too-often to the detriment of collective needs. Tech's reductive methods are inherently amoral, leaving the huddled masses of low-tech humans to suffer from un-met needs. Mech-Tech also disrupts the functional neurology of Nature, allowing Mother Earth to wither away. (hug a tree today)

Therefore, for ethical philosophers, there remains a need for, at the very least, a metaphorical bonding & governing power to hold the disparate parts together. But the notion of ethical Holism is irrelevant to the heartless machines that run the modern world. Can we rely on efficient Science to light the way, or is there a role for feckless Philosophy, to "keep the ends out for the tie that binds"? Is the logical necessity for an ultimate organizing force Real or merely Ideal? Does it matter? :smile:


Those—dying then,
Knew where they went—
They went to God’s Right Hand—
That Hand is amputated now
And God cannot be found—

The abdication of belief
Makes the Behavior small—
Better an ignis fatuus
Than no illume at all--

___Emily Dickinson

:100: :smirk: