Banno
8.6k
...neither of us would feel comfortable with eating meat on Good Friday.
— Frank Apisa
Indeed, ritual runs deep. So on Good Friday I make a point of eating a roast leg and watching Life of Brian. — Banno
I'm not alone in my realization that the Church peddled nonsense to me and I accepted it for years...but although I have broken away completely, there still is that regard for some of the "rigmarole" of the institution despite my resentment of it. — Frank Apisa
Oh, but the naughty parts are the best parts. :wink:Teilhard de Chardin’s writings are forgotten in name only. . . . Don't read him; he's naughty. The Pope says so. — Banno
In other words I'm not interested in discussing religion and how it relates to society. — 3017amen
Your socio-political view seem to be a bit rambling. — 3017amen
Unfortunately, most atheists fall into a similar extremist camp, much like the far-right fundamentalist's do. Meaning, it has the potential to become an antagonistic or resentful or 'I've got an axe to grind' exercise or mentality (even Einstein spoke to that). Nevertheless, as it relates to Philosophy, the irony is that over 75% of Philosophical domain's invoke God, like it or not, as an axiomatic standard by which things are judged.
1. In Ethics: Christian ethics.
2. In Metaphysics: Descartes metaphysics
3. Epistemology: George Berkeley
4. Contemporary philosophy: Soren Kierkegaard
5. Logic: Kant's synthetic a priori knowledge
6. In the philosophy of Religion: God
7. Political philosophy: separation of church and state/In God we trust.
Personally, I have yet to find an atheist able to parse or explain the nature of our mental states from say our sensory perceptions in both a materialistic and non-materialistic way. A few examples are:
What method best explains my will to live or die?
What method can best explain the reason I choose to love or not love?
What method can best explain the nature of my sense of wonder ?
What method can best explain the nature of causation ? (Why should we believe that all events must have a cause.)
What method can best explain the nature of my reaction to seeing the color red, and/or my reaction to music that I love?
Why do I have the ability to perform gravitational calculations when dodging falling objects do not require those mathematical skills for survival? — 3017amen
What method best explains my will to live or die? — 3017amen
What method can best explain the reason I choose to love or not love? — 3017amen
What method can best explain the nature of causation ? (Why should we believe that all events must have a cause.) — 3017amen
What method can best explain the nature of my reaction to seeing the color red, and/or my reaction to music that I love? — 3017amen
If those are the questions/concepts, correct me if I'm wrong, but you refused to attempt any explanation or possible answers to them. They are relative to the nature of [your] conscious existence. — 3017amen
Even those who advocate christian ethics must at least admit that their metaphysical opinions to the subject matter take a second seat to pragmatic concerns. God isn't going to ever be called to a witness stand or be a part of a jury as it will always be humans judging humans. — substantivalism
Metaphysics and philosophy? There are people that are theists in philosophy and metaphysics. . . this is such a shock I would have never discovered it without your help. But for real, no atheist should be either denying that such philosophies or perspectives not exist let alone that such discussions have or do take place. — substantivalism
Most of these questions seem to concern the scientific study of psychology, personal arbitrary convictions that may not possess a "best answer", or concern themselves with problems that metaphysicians who are atheist/theist will possess the same problem with. What exactly are you looking for? Metaphysics/philosophy in general has had a problem with understanding or coming to solutions for each of your listed problems. — substantivalism
Are you talking about epistemology (what method), personal philosophy and introspection (why do I keep living), or psychology/evolutionary biology? — substantivalism
What method can best explain the reason I choose to love or not love? — 3017amen
Again, what are you talking about? Is this about what form of epistemology we can come to know that two people are in love? Are you talking about arbitrary but dictated choices in relationships (one night stand vs. long lasting relationship) which is highly personal? Or the biological indicators of people being in love or starting a relationship (psychology and sociology)? — substantivalism
What method can best explain the nature of causation ? (Why should we believe that all events must have a cause.) — 3017amen
Do all things have a cause? Or are there things that in fact violate say the Principle of Sufficient reason? What is causation? Is it Humean or non-Humean? I don't know. . . maybe we should investigate through scientific methodology and metaphysical introspection. Would you mind joining us? — substantivalism
What method can best explain the nature of my reaction to seeing the color red, and/or my reaction to music that I love? — 3017amen
Are you talking about neurobiology, psychology, or epistemology (scientific methodology)? What do you mean by method and explanation? — substantivalism
Ah, you missed the sore arse and lifelong psychological damage. Good. — Banno
Thanks for sharing your stories. — Frank Apisa
Then, of course, there's also Tom Lehrer's The Vatican Rag.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvhYqeGp_Do — Ciceronianus the White
Hi all!
A while ago I made a post in which i made clear that i'm an extreme noob when it comes to philosophy.
While having bought a history of philosophy book, I still have a few questions that I don't see will be answered by myself anytime soon. So to the question; What is the problem with the arguments that attempt to prove God? The kalam, The five ways, fine tuning, moral argument, ...
The reason why I ask is because I cannot differentiate bad philosophy from good philosophy. Neither do I know all of the intricacies of the structure arguments should have. (modus ponens, valid and sound) While there are a whole lot of people pushing these arguments. And there are also a whole lot of people pushing against them. I can't help but feel that the majority of the discussions that happen about these arguments aren't well grounded. And I'm assuming that people here know a fair deal and are able to give me a clear idea of what's wrong.
I would like to suppose that the arguments all try to deal with a deistic or theistic god.
Let me also add a subquestion to that and ask to the atheist. If these arguments are all a failure. Is that part of the reason why you are atheist?
Thank you! — DoppyTheElv
Teilhard de Chardin’s writings are forgotten in name only. . . . Don't read him; he's naughty. The Pope says so. — Banno
Oh, but the naughty parts are the best parts. :wink:
Anyway, some 21st century scientists are finding (non-biblical) evidence for Teleology (directed evolution, downward causation) in the emerging complexity of the universe. For them, Evolution is viewed, not as a random flux of atoms, but as a self-directing "cybernetic system", otherwise known as a "complex adaptive system" or a "living organism". :nerd:
Downward Causation : cybernetic evolution by "information selection and control".
From Matter To Life : Living Through Downward Causation by Farnsworth, Ellis, & Jaeger of Santa Fe Institute. A think tank for cutting edge science.
https://www.amazon.com/Matter-Life-Information-Causality/dp/1107150531/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=from+matter+to+life&link_code=qs&qid=1595179211&sourceid=Mozilla-search&sr=8-2&tag=mozilla-20
Worlds Hidden in Plain Sight : The Evolving Idea of Complexity at the Santa Fe Institute
https://www.amazon.com/Worlds-Hidden-Plain-Sight-Complexity/dp/1947864149/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= — Gnomon
When we look at all the different beliefs we can see Christianity is is a combination of beliefs including Egyptian and Persian religions and Hellenism. — Athena
Should I take your inability or unwillingness to answer the metaphysical questions (the nature of your existence) as acquiescence by silence? — 3017amen
The reason why I ask is because I cannot differentiate bad philosophy from good philosophy. — DoppyTheElv
Neither do I know all of the intricacies of the structure arguments should have. (modus ponens, valid and sound) While there are a whole lot of people pushing these arguments. And there are also a whole lot of people pushing against them. I can't help but feel that the majority of the discussions that happen about these arguments aren't well grounded. — DoppyTheElv
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.