“…no matter how much the thoughts off the top of our heads won’t shut up.” — Joe Mello
Afraid of what? — EugeneW
Haha! Why not? I'm gonna call them Stephen. If we know everything, will we all be Stephen? — EugeneW
This non-existent god, religious threats, oblivion! — universeness
I'm not afraid of god. I love them! Gave us the gift of live — EugeneW
Rather than disbelieving in a god because there is no proof, one should disbelieve because the concept itself is repugnant. — Joshs
Do you see the universe as a superbeing of which we are tiny parts?
Does that mean you are too scared not to love them?
Your parents created you, gave you life, does that mean you must always love them no matter what they do to you or others? — universeness
Isn't that more a case of refusing to accept a god on the grounds of personal taste? Would that not be analogous to saying I don't believe in the laws of my country because they are repugnant and limit my individual freedoms — Tom Storm
Martin Hagglund’s argument is that essential
to faith in God is a belief in , and desire for, the eternal.
He argues instead that finitude is preferable to eternity. — Joshs
This problem can be traced even within religious traditions that espouse faith in eternal life. An article in U.S. Catholic asks: “Heaven: Will It be Boring?” — Joshs
Far from making my life meaningful, eternity would make it meaningless, since my actions would have no purpose. — Joshs
I'm assuming that in the logic of super physical thinking, entering the realm of eternity with god would bring with it an entirely different perspective and value system, which would generate a different outlook on such matters. — Tom Storm
He uses a Derridean deconstructive approach to show that any value that is assumed to be beyond cultural contingency, such as universal notions of the good , the moral , the just or the generous , are incoherent. It is not just that we should prefer finitude over the eternal, the unconditional or the universal, but that all such assumptions fall prey to their own deconstruction. All valuation is contingent and relative. This is just as true of our imagining of a timeless deity, value structure, notion of the good or the true as it is of scientific and aesthetic endeavor. — Joshs
Hagglund’s argument goes deeper than simply critiquing the idea of heaven. He uses a Derridean deconstructive approach to show that any value that is assumed to be beyond cultural contingency, such as universal notions of the good , the moral , the just or the generous , are incoherent. It is not just that we should prefer finitude over the eternal, the unconditional or the universal, but that all such assumptions fall prey to their own deconstruction. All valuation is contingent and relative. This is just as true of our imagining of a timeless deity, value structure, notion of the good or the true as it is of scientific and aesthetic endeavor. — Joshs
Nope. That's your interpretation of my post. I can't blame you. You're gung ho about your view. Suit yourself.So, you’re confused because I have written words you do not understand, and not because you do not understand the words I have written? Sorry, dude, that’s idiotic. — Joe Mello
No combination of lesser things can create a greater thing without something greater than the greater thing added to the lesser things. — Joe Mello
"Those who must convince everyone that their religion, ideology, political persuasion, or philosophical theory is the only one worth having." This would explain why you are having so much trouble here. This thread is long but I wouldn't interpret that as popular. — Monitor
I guess the Clowns in the Clown Car on this forum drove to my neighborhood and got out.
They threw a lot of pies at me but only hit themselves in the face.
What a mess … — Joe Mello
No combination of lesser things can create a greater thing without something greater than the greater thing added to the lesser things.
I look forward to our discussions — Joe Mello
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.