Printable View
How spot on do you consider his metaphysical rant in his third meditation trying to prove the existence of God? Tell me if you spot any bullshit.
Rate him based on a 5 star rating. I'll add a poll...
You can read it here if you haven't already: http://www.philosophy-index.com/desc...ations/iii.php
Everyone trying to prove the existence of a god in the motherfucking 21st century is sinking in shit to their neck.
People are becoming more intelligent to see trough the fairy tales of any religion.It is mostly the uneducated and rural people as well as third world countries/middle east where people still have faith in a "God" and even they are changing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterSV
Quote:
A responsible atheist needs to be informed about religion in order to reject it. But the shallow, smirky atheism that’s au courant is simply strengthening the power of the Right. Secular humanism is spiritually hollow right now because art is so weak. If you don’t have art as a replacement for the Bible, then you’ve got nothing that is culturally sustaining. If all you have is “Mad Men” and the Jon Stewart “Daily Show,” then religion is going to win, because people need something as a framework to understand life. Every great religion contains enormous truths about the universe. [...] People in the humanities have sunk into this shallow, snobby, liberal style of stereotyping religious believers as ignorant and medieval, which is total nonsense.
Camille Paglia
The belief in the existence of a deity, a God or any kind of metaphysical (or physical!) higher order doesn't have much to do with intelligence nor with the time period we're in, in my opinion. I don't see what makes you think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterSV
In his third meditation Descartes I think is simply trying to prove in a higher power, but not necessary in God the way typical religions portray him.
Like for instance, I believe in the supernatural and have witnessed occurrences that defy the laws of physics, and I attribute these supernatural experiences to a "higher power" but not necessary as in God the way typical religions portray him (e.g. Jesus, etc). So in that case when trying to prove in a higher power capable of achievements beyond human I think Descartes is quite spot on.
Well, we'd first have to define god to begin with. What is god other than a higher power? I personally am more fond of the 'pagan' definition of gods; higher metaphysical beings who are not necessarily inherently benevolent to humans, but rather need to be placated just like people.Quote:
Originally Posted by shazou