Philosophy Now Forum

While you are following the logic of Descartes you might like to fix this statement up as well: "yes". But what he did not say was that these thoughts that one could know were being produced by phenomenon". If you read his Meditations you will see that Descartes acknowledges that tho...

Y'know...I think it's really not so much about just knowing or saying the right things; it's about taking them to heart and doing them. And it's not really about the liturgy or the denomination, either way; it's about the relationship.

Well it's certainly not a very scientific approach! But it is a convenient story to support ones belief, in that which is non-provable using the scientific method. Two suggestions on that. Firstly, while science is an excellent thing, a great resource for studying the physical world and for produci...

My understanding of Christianity is primarily from the Lutheran perspective, I do not claim much knowledge outside those limits. If there are other dogmas that do not conform to these beliefs, I may not be aware of them. Yep, there are...well, I wouldn't in all case call them "dogmas," si...

I see this: "you "know" it as an internal impression of your own," as impossible. I wouldn't see why. Let us suppose, just fictively, that there were a Supreme Being. And, let us further suppose, you had a dream, vision or revelation of Him, one given by Him. Now notice: I'm not...

False dichotomy. I have said many times that to my mind, the most plausible explanation for all the phenomena that give the impression of an external world is an external world that is responsible for the phenomena. What I haven't done is identify ""unknowledgeable" behavior". N...

I really have no time for those who can't make a little effort to actually think about what they claim to believe. Agreed. You can offer them the chance, but if they refuse it...there's not much you can do. My own belief, based on what I have read, leads me to the understanding that the ends will b...

Right. I'm not a proponent of secular ethics. They don't work, and they can't be compelled by dint of any line of reasoning. The thing I like least about them, therefore, is that they can ordinarily only be compelled by force or propaganda, since they cannot be defended by any rational means or to a...

Going by the conservation you had with uwot you were also having a lot of trouble accepting Descartes argument as well. I'm not a Cartesian, if that's what you mean. But I can follow the logic of Descartes position to its conclusion, and tell you what that is. So I was just showing where it leads, ...

Since I don't hold to any of that, (I see it as the wild imaginings of some alleged religious leaders), I see that the end result of both are much the same, On what basis are you choosing to disbelieve the former and believe the latter? Just preference? And if it's only that, then what gives you suc...

If you dealing with only stupid and self-refuting argugments then one could just as easily show you know there is a God by way of evidence obtained from the external world, or you know there is a God by way of internal impressions. You could seek either kind of evidence or both. But nothing would b...

Actually, Descartes did provide an argument for the existence of the external world. "God is no deceiver". You will find this argument in his Meditations. The fourth I think. Oh, I know this. But atheists would not accept that logical reparation of the problem, since it would require them...

Nope, not quite.

I'd say only this: secular ethics has nothing but functionalism as a hope for its legitimacy. And it fails at that, because it cannot logically justify one particular "function" over another.

Too many words. Sorry about that. Yeah, I'm really struggling to find something worth addressing in there. It all just looks off-topic for this thread, just as you note. This is maybe a debate we'd be best to hold elsewhere. For now, let's deal with Bulverism, or if you prefer, the ad hominem falla...

Perhaps different paths, but to the same end Wow. I wouldn't think so at all. What does personal Nirvana (soul-extinction, essentially, and certainly disembodiment and destruction of individuality) got to do with resurrection of the body, Divine Judgment, life after, restoration of the physical wor...