Sep 4, 2018 05:43 PM
(Sep 4, 2018 04:54 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently you can't differentiate theology from philosophy.
In case you didn’t notice, the ball was kicked out of bounds eons ago.
Game over!
(Sep 4, 2018 04:54 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently you can't differentiate theology from philosophy.
(Sep 4, 2018 04:14 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ](Sep 4, 2018 03:33 PM)Ostronomos Wrote: [ -> ]Because I have actually seen that vast all-encompassing consciousness.
And then—and then things start to get really scary.
Were you with Syne? Were guys smoking, snorting, or drinking anything?
(Sep 4, 2018 05:43 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ](Sep 4, 2018 04:54 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently you can't differentiate theology from philosophy.
In case you didn’t notice, the ball was kicked out of bounds eons ago.
Game over!
(Sep 4, 2018 07:02 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]You’re in a metaphysical realm. I can’t touch that.
But don’t think for a minute that you’re above Ostronomos.
(Sep 3, 2018 03:29 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Reality as in 'all' is something that we’ll never fully grasp. This is an area where uncertainty cannot be removed with further analysis and experimentation.
(Sep 4, 2018 07:21 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]What, you're incapable of using logic and reason to question things like reality, truth, and the underlying basis for every opinion/belief you have?
Like I said, avoiding cognitive dissonance.
Delusion is not "above" anyone. Yours, that you believe you have a handle on things you refuse to delve any deeper into, and his, that he believes he understands something (likely drug-induced) he cannot even properly define.
(Sep 3, 2018 05:28 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]As Feser says, if the ultimate basis for reality is not only unknown but also unknowable, not because of the limitations of our knowledge but because it is without intelligible cause/reason, then any argument in that vein is equally unintelligible, as that argument denies that the very reason used to assert it has any fundamental basis in reality. It's a self-defeating argument.
(Sep 4, 2018 08:28 PM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]Again, no one said that any ultimate cause would, or even could, encompass explaining everything (nor that it would, itself, have no explanation). It only provides a solid epistemology for more mundane claims. If reality is fundamentally inscrutable, then the intelligibility of everything else is suspect.(Sep 3, 2018 03:29 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Reality as in 'all' is something that we’ll never fully grasp. This is an area where uncertainty cannot be removed with further analysis and experimentation.
I'm inclined to agree.
Actually, I'm rather skeptical that reality has any ultimate, final secret, something that explains everything else and needs no explanation itself.
(Sep 4, 2018 08:30 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, just so much projection.(Sep 4, 2018 07:21 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]What, you're incapable of using logic and reason to question things like reality, truth, and the underlying basis for every opinion/belief you have?
Like I said, avoiding cognitive dissonance.
Delusion is not "above" anyone. Yours, that you believe you have a handle on things you refuse to delve any deeper into, and his, that he believes he understands something (likely drug-induced) he cannot even properly define.
Well then, let's start with some of Aquinas' basics. Acts and attributes. Let's take a look at some of yours.
I'm willing to do the work. You, not so much. You're lazy, resort to ad hominems, YouTube videos, and pop-shit.
You make everyone else do the work.
(Sep 4, 2018 08:45 PM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]I haven't watched the video, since it apparently goes on for an hour.Any argument that purports to be better than any other. On what basis?
(Sep 3, 2018 05:28 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]As Feser says, if the ultimate basis for reality is not only unknown but also unknowable, not because of the limitations of our knowledge but because it is without intelligible cause/reason, then any argument in that vein is equally unintelligible, as that argument denies that the very reason used to assert it has any fundamental basis in reality. It's a self-defeating argument.
What "argument in that vein"? Feser is evidently arguing against some view that he disagrees with, but I don't know what.
(Sep 4, 2018 08:45 PM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]What "argument in that vein"? Feser is evidently arguing against some view that he disagrees with, but I don't know what.