BTW, this topic has made me think, "what do people consider overtly Christian? " — Count Timothy von Icarus
Perhaps its your assessment/interpretation of my postings that cause you to judge my viewpoints as simplistic. That's not my problem, it's more your inability to interpret my postings in the same way I do.
I fully accept that this is a very common circumstance, that we have no choice but to each endure in our own way. — universeness
That's not my problem — universeness
I don't think so. I think you really are missing the point of unenlightened's post. Questions about divinity and Christianity aren't as simple as you're making them out to be. I would encourage you to delve into them and find out. — frank
Those ideas may have their place in theology or discussion within the context of shared faith, but not in philosophy, whereas the practical human wisdom (phronesis) which may be exemplified in literature, including religious scriptures, does have a place in philosophy. — Janus
Moderator Mikie's thread on religion has been troubled by unclear communication which I think is his problem. — BC
Treating religious stories as literature, which may convey wisdom, as any good literature may, is not the same as arguing pointlessly over the existence of God or gods or the reality of ideas like karma or rebirth. — Janus
Scholastic philosophers taught the skill of argumentation by having students create proofs of God on their own, and their arguments would be critiqued. For a newbie, it's very fertile ground. It's like a philosophy gymnasium. — frank
Aristotle made proofs of God as well. What's your expert opinion on that? — frank
I don't have an "expert opinion" since I am not a scholar of Ancient Greek philosophy, but the argument from first causes, for example, presupposes the ancient's understanding of causation. Also, unless I am mistaken, Aristotle did not argue for God, but for a "Prime Mover" or demiurge. — Janus
...think it's a mistake to think that the only people who can do philosophy are those trained in philosophy. — Sam26
He had multiple proofs of God. Aquinas' proofs are modeled on them. The Christian founders approved of the use of ancient Greek philosophers in Christian thinking. What's your expert opinion on that? — frank
How about you present them and then we can discuss them. I don't believe they were arguments for God as conceived by the Christian founders, but I am aware that they were adapted to support their Christian theology. — Janus
Treating religious stories as literature, which may convey wisdom, as any good literature may, is not the same as arguing pointlessly over the existence of God or gods or the reality of ideas like karma or rebirth. — Janus
If I misunderstood you, and you are not condemning religion holus bolus, then perhaps we have no argument after all. — Janus
I think that all you do with statements like this is offer succour to sophists.If you do not communicate successfully, that IS your problem. Granted: there are people who manage to misunderstand a simple phrase like "Good morning". But quite often when posters are misunderstood, it is the poster's fault, and the problems are typical of writers in general. That's why publishers and newspapers employ editors. — BC
The fact you refer to him as 'Moderator Mikie,' is (in the context you use it,) a cheap shot and a rather pathetic one on your part.Moderator Mikie's thread on religion has been troubled by unclear communication which I think is his problem. I don't quite know why he's not stating his case more clearly. Perhaps a vague concept at the beginning--God & Christianity Aren’t Special--has hobbled his thinking. — BC
This sort of puzzle always interested me. — Count Timothy von Icarus
E.g. quarks and leptons are the fundemental forms and everything else emerges from this austere ontology. — Count Timothy von Icarus
Platonist-like conceptions of physics center around things being fundementally mathematical. E.g., of quarks Wilzek says "the it is the bit," as they only exist as spaceless mathematical entities. — Count Timothy von Icarus
I agree about that. But again, who involves themselves in such arguments except committed believers and equally committed disbelievers? As if religion were nothing but an alternative physics. — unenlightened
But i would also like to point out that the idea that time can be, and ought not to be, wasted in pointless activity is very much a Protestant Christian attitude derived usually from the parable of the talents. It would make little sense in any African or Indian tradition for example. All things must pass, but nothing is wasted. — unenlightened
I do think that the human race would benefit greatly if all theism and theosophism was abandoned, as the BS I think it is. — universeness
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.