Philosophy Now Forum

Christ seems to have made it pretty clear that war and strife are not options we have in order to follow him. 34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mo...

Again, I don't know. If there is a God, then maybe I don't have a choice which God is the 'true' one. If there isn't a God, then I would just hope that there can be peace in some way shape or form. I mean, maybe there isn't a God or maybe God is one that isn't worth worshiping. I couldn't tell you....

I don't know. If there is a God, and it was Jesus and Jesus commanded us to turn the other cheek, then I assume it wasn't a good thing. If there isn't a God and Jesus commanded us to turn the other cheek, then it could be either, I suppose. I'm agnostic, just to be clear, so it's difficult for me t...

If you look around, there is more peace than war. There is more reconciliation than conflict.

It looks like an instruction to kill us, yes. Should we kill them back or should we give the other cheek and seek peace?

The only reason you are not a Muslim now, is because Christians have fought back.

In hindsight, was that a good thing or a bad thing?

I don't see the logic in that.

Why shouldn't people have differences?

That's your aim, perhaps, but mine revolves more around philosophers, using the tools at their disposal, exploring the extent to which, re those like Kant, they can discern what is categorically and imperatively moral or immoral pertaining to sex. Yeah, that's really demonstrated by your interactio...

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 4:50 am Islam is a cancer to the freedoms we have taken for granted.

There is no such thing "Islamaphobia" - a phobia is an irrational fear, whereas any intelligent society should fear the spread of this evil ideology.

It's been spreading since the year 610 and the world hasn't ended yet.

That's your aim, perhaps, but mine revolves more around philosophers, using the tools at their disposal, exploring the extent to which, re those like Kant, they can discern what is categorically and imperatively moral or immoral pertaining to sex. Yeah, that's really demonstrated by your interactio...

Ultimately, all knowledge is a social construction.

It's "created" by humans for human consumption because it performs a social function.

That seems obviously false. Especially when it comes to science, which has knowledge without any apparent social function.

Point number 1 to settle is whether it is the business of people to know about the sexual activities of others. That's your point number one. Mine is to note that down through ages and across the globe, human communities have configured that social necessity into any number of ofttimes conflicting ...

So you said that you use science to corroborate your beliefs about creation.

And now you trash science.

Must make sense to someone.

If a claim is subjective, you cannot check it against anything, and that subsequently brings into question whther it can have a truth value at all. That would make subjective morality pretty well useless. Morality is useful for what we use it for, which is a set of social practises that make it pos...

Now "Internal server error"