Most popular level ‘arguments for God’ are based on the ‘art/artisan’ analogy, which is probably dismissed a little to easily at times. But nature can still quite rightly and easily seen to be God’s creation even if it was not ‘artificially‘ designed. Artifacts are designed by an artisan, and ‘natural’ things have a mystifying yet lawful and consistent character of . . . → Read More: the nature of nature
|
||||||
|
Pardon the double negative, but it’s not for no reason that the title of philosopher, author and atheist, Dr. Erik J. Wielenberg’s article in a recent issue of the American Theological Inquiry (yes, a theological journal published an article by an atheist) is called “OBJECTIVE MORALITY AND THE NATURE OF REALITY”. Views of morality and reality are inseparable. Ontology is . . . → Read More: ethical being The notion is reflected commonly in popular discourse. Humans wreck the planet and the earth, the universe, or nature ‘fights back’. Noah’s flood, local or global is nothing compared to what our angry step-mother-nature will do if we don’t change our ways and look after the planet better… Makes an entertaining novel, movie, etc. Because in our culture, we are . . . → Read More: mother nature as killer Somewhat related to epistemology (but I’m not going there now) is the question of how emotion & desire can relate truth or moral guidance. It is often assumed by we post-Romantics that ‘doing what you want’ is about the most sinful or dangerous thing imaginable. ‘Doing what is right’ is better, we say; …and if what is ‘right’ happens to . . . → Read More: want vs. like …or evolutionary teleology – here – worth reading (post & comments). This relates to the so-called ‘problem’ that if God used evolution to create (only!?) humans, then all of the extinct species were ‘wasted’. How anthropocentric! What was God doing, we are asked, for the over-whelming majority of the universe’s supposed 13+ billion years? The reason this problem is not . . . → Read More: diverse goal It’s not every day you see an article in a theological journal by an atheist. But lo and behold, the latest issue (downloadable here freely) of American Theological Inquiry includes a ‘guest’ article by Erik J. Wielenberg called “Objective Morality and the Nature of Reality”, which is a rejoinder to a theistic critique in a former issue. He calls his . . . → Read More: brute moral facts? Interesting article (with video) here. Very few people would say that killing humans is categorically wrong (all times, places & circumstances). Most would have general ideas about extenuating – and tragic – circumstances which justify it. So, a kind of moral calculus is almost always at work where the weight of the consequences of killing is contrasted with the weight of the consequences of not . . . → Read More: good killing? Not only are Sam Harris’ recent thoughts about morality in tension with basic philosophical distinctions such as is/ought and fact/value, it also re-raises basic questions raised by utilitarian ethics – namely which version of ‘happiness’ is right? I listened to an interesting discussion of Sam’s ideas today (thanks to Damian for highlighting it), and at one point they were talking . . . → Read More: good maximal happiness? Another culturally embedded phrase in addition to “just as nature intended” refers to “letting nature take its course.” Excuse me? …its course?? Again, nature has no intentions… as if it had some magical ability to transcend itself and perceive the course of its own history… in other words, as if nature were supernatural. |
|
|||||
|
Copyright © 2012 | Log in | | All Rights Reserved |
||||||
threshing floor