Philosophy Now Forum

And Christianity - whether Jews for Christ or Evangelistic Christians (whichever Immanuel is) - has not done such a good job in giving us an ethical world. Well, as you know, Christianity does not control the world. It never has. Catholicism, arguably controlled some of the world for some of histor...

Let us construct better ethical theories for which the only 'authority' is reason and workability for the enhancement of the lives of sentient beings. The theory will have coherence, correspondence with empirical facts, and existential compatibility and resonance; it will be elegant. In other words...

Then don't you think you should aim higher?

You mean, don't you think anyone should aim higher than the gratuitously ad hominem?

Absolutely.

Why is your god hypothesis more interesting than anything that might be true IF there were a flying spaghetti monster? Well, if it's not interesting to you, of course, it's not interesting. I could hardly complain about that. But it's interesting to me. If it's a live philosophical question whether...

Best wishes.

No true Scotsman. It's a fallacy, dontcha know? It's only a fallacy when the "true" nature of Scottishness simply cannot be specified by any rational means. If it can, then we can indeed have a "true" or "false" Scotsman, and it's no fallacy. "Christian" is v...

Yet, you still come back and post the same inadequacies.

Then do us all a favour, and show me what about the beliefs I've expressed is incorrect.

It is not that interesting because you are not talking about free will, you are talking about probabilistic determinism. That's like saying "certain uncertainty." It's an oxymoron. And unless an oxymoron can be explained, then it's just a logical contradiction. So maybe you can explain ho...

My sympathies.

most people know what they know and nothing is going to change that. Then those people are not philosophers. They're just indoctrinated or foolish, whether they're Theists, Agnostics or Atheists. OK then, I'll go along with different groundings make for different interpretations. Now you've got it!...

I makes no difference if they have good or bad reasons for disagreeing with you. Sure it does. This is a philosophy board. "Good reasons" is all we're interested in. It always makes a difference if the reasons you propose are good or bad. If it didn't, what are we debating? The fact is th...

I am sure Catholics would disagree with you on that one. Would they disagree that MacIntyre is a Catholic and that he got his view from Aquinas, who got it from Aristotle? I don't think they would. It's common knowledge, even among Catholic scholars. They're fine with that. Would they disagree with...

how many experiments have "you, yourself" actually done? Actually, this serves my point, not the one you seem at pains to make. The Agnostic has done no experiments at all, but has taken for granted whatever he heard, read or surfed up. Now, in what way is he ahead of me, one who believes...

Greylorn:
Actually, since objective an subjective are not specifically tied to individual and collective, he could be meaning it as he says. Either way, they're two different issues.

I'm not bothering myself about him anymore, thedoc. I gave him a chance to have a reasonable say in a civilized manner, and apparently he just couldn't do it.
So I invite you to feel free not to bother either, unless you find some pleasure in it. He's no concern of mine.