Issue 99 - God, Belief and Disbelief

Latest news of Philosophy Now

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9612
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Issue 99 - God, Belief and Disbelief

Post by Immanuel Can »

thedoc wrote:
Immanuel Can wrote: My counsel is this: "Abstain from the indiscriminate dispersal of nacreous spheroids in porcine precincts." :wink:
Nice, that took me a few minutes to figure it out, but that is a good variation on a Bible verse, Matthew 7:6.
Well done. Quite so.
Greylorn Ell
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:13 pm
Location: SE Arizona

Re: Issue 99 - God, Belief and Disbelief

Post by Greylorn Ell »

Felasco wrote: Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:39 pm Good luck with the issue Rick. I just finished reading the article by William Lane Craig that you posted in the other thread, thanks for that.

While the William Lane Craig article, and the others I'm sure as well, are intelligent, articulate and well reasoned it seems (correct me if I'm wrong here) that they all share the same fundamental assumption that continuing a philosophic investigation of God that's been going on for thousands of years will somehow lead to some result other than what we already have.

Where is the philosopher who will challenge not just this or that theory of God, but the process itself? Such as, where is the evidence that this process is leading anywhere?

I thought philosophy was supposed to be a means to an end. I get the sense that for many writers it's become an end in itself, and no longer serves any purpose beyond it's own self perpetuation.

I don't have a philosophy education, and so will welcome your guidance here. Are there philosophers who are willing to actually face the evidence, or is that just a nice slogan?
You got it right with "nice slogan." Although I've gotten two books published about alternative concepts of the nature of human consciousness and causes thereof, ideas proposed on this website have fallen flat. Perhaps because they are based upon physics principles which no one on this site understands.

Any attempt to introduce innovative ideas onto this site will be sandbagged into oblivion, and the moderators will allow that.

You have a good sense of the actual worth of philosophy. Ideally it should be what a table full of student engineers at a Friday night campus tavern comes up with when one of them is drunk enough to ask-- What the f--k are we, as human beings?

The functional value of philosophy is to support university departments who pay big salaries to dimwits who know nothing of physics and nonetheless propose explanations for the existence of anything.
GL
Skepdick
Posts: 5242
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Issue 99 - God, Belief and Disbelief

Post by Skepdick »

Greylorn Ell wrote: Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:03 pm You got it right with "nice slogan." Although I've gotten two books published about alternative concepts of the nature of human consciousness and causes thereof, ideas proposed on this website have fallen flat. Perhaps because they are based upon physics principles which no one on this site understands.

Any attempt to introduce innovative ideas onto this site will be sandbagged into oblivion, and the moderators will allow that.

You have a good sense of the actual worth of philosophy. Ideally it should be what a table full of student engineers at a Friday night campus tavern comes up with when one of them is drunk enough to ask-- What the f--k are we, as human beings?

The functional value of philosophy is to support university departments who pay big salaries to dimwits who know nothing of physics and nonetheless propose explanations for the existence of anything.
GL
Instead of lambasting others for ignoring your "brilliant" ideas, consider that nobody owes you the time to close the gap between their knowledge and your knowledge.

It's your fault for being unable to explain your ideas to a 5 year old.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/HLqWn5L ... -distances
Post Reply