Conversation

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by nonob, Apr 27, 2002.

  1. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    I came across this conversation in a philosophy forum:

    "Tor: Theology presupposes a God, philosophy doesn't. Theology is
    reasoned belief, philosophy is a belief in reason. This is the
    essential difference between the two; it is the difference of de-
    pendence and independence; the difference of water and fire.
    Philosophy was once the handmaiden of theology; it caused
    the pot to boil. Theology as such could never be the hand-
    maiden of philosophy, it would only put out the fire.
    The question 'what is the nature of God?' is no longer a
    philosophical concern. Philosophy can exist and does quite
    well without such questions. Theology itself is even learning
    to get along without them. Of course theologians are over-
    ridden by the more crucial, life threatening question 'does
    God exist?'. There is a great deal of a-theology in the air.
    Voltaire has come of age and God must be invented --- all
    over again. Only this time he has to be constructed out
    of reason and not belief, but philosophy won't lend a hand.
    Thus, despite the contradiction in terms, theologians are
    trying hard to become 'philosophical', while employing every
    means available to waylag the journey of actual philosophers,
    to catch them, if not to turn them completely about.
    Today there are many theologians who, although unable to
    convince the atheists in their own midst of God's existence,
    nevertheless don a cloak of objectivity and appeal to the
    learned world at large to adopt agnosticism. This is Pascal's
    wager all over again, only much watered down. In effect,
    they want every free-thinking and independent soul to remain
    waiting in their churches, synagogues, and monastaries with
    hands clapsed in prayer...until all the 'evidence' comes in.
    There are several reasons for such an appeal, the most
    obvious of which are to gain time, to limit the amount of ill
    spoken of religion as a whole, and, if possible, to engender
    a new doubt in the hearts of those who are already doubters.
    If they wait out the feelings of secularism to change, then
    perhaps they can pounce upon the scene again, usurping
    control of society and proclaiming the priest as ruler. In
    effect, the whole plan is but an ill-disguised attempt to gain
    power; or if you will, from another perspective, an expression
    of powerlessness and seclusion --- since such an appeal
    has no hope of winning adherents.

    cognito: Religion originally came about to satisfy man's questions about the world around him. Then it was used by certain powers to control. Now... It is simply there to spread fevered belief. That also brings about somehing I was thinking about earlier. Is there any state higher than existence? Woldn't existence be the highest state, and threfore perfection? That would mean that if God existed, God was perfect, and we're all pefect. Therefore we are equal to God or we all are God. But then if something didn't exist would have a state of non-perfection, and could a non-existent thing have a state, even a state of non-existence? But, in all respect to those who practice a particular faith, I would like to say that nowdays religion is sometimes used to instill morality in people.

    Tor: Whether inadvertantly or not, you have given an interesting,
    and may I say 'excellent', spin to the whole St.Anslem/Fool
    argument. Now I want to read this old argument again --- from
    a fresh perspective."

    Questions, comments? I have to admit I found it interesting.
     
  2. Optional

    Optional
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    I personally think you need to get back under the bridge.
     
  3. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
    You are correct concerning philosophy and religion but look at it this way: religion provides the answers which philosophy poses.

    On the other hand, Christianity (which technically is a Person - the Incarnate God - and not a religion) offers a ground of being which the shifting sands of religion or philosophy cannot provide...

    Matthew 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
     
  4. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe, but philosophy can change quickly and can adpat to new ideas. Philosophy sometimes poses questions that religion cannot answer, or won't answer. Philosphy allows thinking. Theology does too, but sometimes it does not allow enough new ideas.
     
  5. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,547
    Likes Received:
    212
    So nonob, it sounds like you're arguing in favor of philosophy over religion.

    Are you sure you're in the correct forum?
     
  6. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of couse I am. I am a Baptist like any of you, except I like to argue differernt sides. This is an interesting view, even if I don't agree with it.
     
  7. Optional

    Optional
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    I still think you're trolling, but I'll play.

    Out of 8 definitions in Webster, "a belief in reason" is not one of them for philosophy, so it appears a strawman is being erected. Philosophy is by nature a "self-discipline". A self struggling for reasons to believe...whatever.

    Nope - sorry, but that's a philosophical question for which theology can lend a hand. Seems someone has it backwards.

    This is a very old argument - not new. Our theology is constructed from faith through reasoned belief.

    [the remainder is simply a personal rant without any reasoning or evidence - simply personal opinion]

    Typical circular reasoning and totally non-sensical atheistic/agnostic philosophy.

    Prove to me you're not just trolling. Which bits did you find interesting and why?
     
  8. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you rely on the dictionary to define everything for you? Becasue I sure don't.

    Even as a practicing Baptist, I still can see you are wrong. How can theology

    Isn't most of philosphy and theology personal opinion? But, this is simply circular reasoning.

    I'm not quite sure what you mean by "trolling", but I found Tor's perspective of philosophy vs. theology interesting.

    Even as a practicing Baptist, I still can see you are wrong. Maybe theology isn't considering that question, but how can it help philosophy with that if theology only exists with the assumption that there is a god? It can give proof to philosphy about this, because it's very existence relies upon the fact.

    Isn't most of philosphy and theology personal opinion? But, this is simply circular reasoning.

    I'm not quite sure what you mean by "trolling", but I found Tor's perspective of philosophy vs. theology interesting.
     
  9. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,547
    Likes Received:
    212
    Then I hereby state my definition of philosophy as: Those methods of reasoning which necessarily reject any theological standpoint whatsoever.

    See the problem with your response?

    Now, philosophy is defined as the use of reason to understand things, and/or a set of beliefs about a particular area of study. In that regard, religion is itself philosophy.

    The way you defined philosophy--"belief in reason"--necessarily dictates that philosophy is itself a religion, since you have to believe in it for it to be of any worth.
     
  10. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, if that's how you would like to define philosophy, fine. BUT, you're probably not going to get alot of people who agree. And yes, religons do happen to have their own philosophy.
    Oh, and that conversation I posted, it wasn't mine. I found it in a forum. Hey, this is a lively discussion! B-D
     
  11. Michael Edwards

    Michael Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nonob:

    What do you find interesting about it anyway?

    I graduated with a degree in philosophy from a Catholic University to boot!

    However, I am solidly biblical and Baptist!

    I don't find much interesting in that conversation. If one who was writing it is a philosopher, they are a weak one and also assert their own presupposition that the question of God's existence is no longer important to philosophy. It is of the core and utmost importance to historical and modern philosophy.

    Michael
     
  12. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think what Tor was implying, was that philosophy was no longer being "used" by theology to determine the nature of God, that it ws no longer consumed by questions like that. But it can still ask them. Then again, theology is not exactly consumed by questions like that either, I think.
     
  13. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,547
    Likes Received:
    212
    And that exactly is the problem. If you're starting with a definition that isn't accepted--which the dictionary definitions, as a general rule of thumb, are--then automatically there are no grounds for agreement until you can get someone to accept your definition.

    Kind of like the argument about abortion. If you don't agree that a fetus is a human being to begin with, then there's really nothing more to discuss.

    Understand?
     
  14. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Touche. ;) Si. You ARE good.
     
  15. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
    Dear Nonob,

    You posted...

    >>Philosophy sometimes poses questions that religion cannot answer, or won't answer>>

    Fair enough, can you give an example?
    And do you include Bible believing Christianity as a "religion" per the statement above?

    HankD
     
  16. Clint Kritzer

    Clint Kritzer
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2001
    Messages:
    7,739
    Likes Received:
    4
    nonob -

    As the original post is not your own wording, we require a source of this information for copyright.

    Clint Kritzer
    Moderator
     
  17. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure, does God exist? Religion can try to answer that, but they can't. Because even though God does exist, it's kind of hard to prove it.
    Ummm... I'm not sure what you mean by that. The statement above said: "Touche. You are good. ;) "
     
  18. nonob

    nonob
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was a forum post, response, response kind of conversation, but ok. Copyright: Tor and Cognito @killdevilhill.com
     
  19. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
    Dear Nonob,

    You posted...

    >>Philosophy sometimes poses questions that religion cannot answer, or won't answer>>

    Then , I said…

    >>Fair enough, can you give an example?
    And do you include Bible believing Christianity as a "religion" per the statement above?>>

    When I said "the statement above" I meant the following statement
    >>Philosophy sometimes poses questions that religion cannot answer, or won't answer>>

    I also said that in my view true Christianity is a Person (Jesus Christ) and not strictly a religion.

    Then I asked for an example of a question which philosophy asks but religion can't or won't answer.

    You responded with…

    >> Sure, does God exist? Religion can try to answer that, but they can't. Because even though God does exist, it's kind of hard to prove it.>>

    Well, now you have put another ingredient into the recipe, proof. The Bible assumes the existence of God. So, if you meant an answer including proof then you are correct. The source of Christian truth is the Bible and the Bible offers no proof for the existence of God and in fact says:

    Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

    HankD
     
  20. Optional

    Optional
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about that source? I would like to see more convoluted logic.
     

Share This Page

Loading...