Is This You?
Is this you?
-You don't believe in God (as traditionally understood- some of you play weird semantics games here coughcoughJohnDewey)
-You believe in some form of socialistic type politics
-You believe the role which has traditionally been played by God should be played by Reason
I am just wondering.
Do you agree with these premises? Obviously, maybe you would basically put them in different words but I wonder if people here would basically fit with this.
I have heard that people interested in philosophy tend to be atheists who believe in some form of socialistic type politics and who believe society must be ruled by Reason.
I am not here arguing against said position, just curious if people do indeed fit it.
Do you agree with position? Do you disagree with it? Why or why not?- if you are so inclined to elaborate.
-You don't believe in God (as traditionally understood- some of you play weird semantics games here coughcoughJohnDewey)
-You believe in some form of socialistic type politics
-You believe the role which has traditionally been played by God should be played by Reason
I am just wondering.
Do you agree with these premises? Obviously, maybe you would basically put them in different words but I wonder if people here would basically fit with this.
I have heard that people interested in philosophy tend to be atheists who believe in some form of socialistic type politics and who believe society must be ruled by Reason.
I am not here arguing against said position, just curious if people do indeed fit it.
Do you agree with position? Do you disagree with it? Why or why not?- if you are so inclined to elaborate.
Comments (17)
Correct.
Quoting Ram
What does it mean to "believe in X politics"? Do I think that pure socialism is the best economic strategy? No. Do I think that laissez faire capitalism is the best? No. I think both free market and central planning strategies have their pros and cons, and each of them has a place in various aspects of our society (eg: public education needs central planning, public healthcare could use central planning, higher education needs a free market (for competitive funding/research), medicinal research also needs a free market. We need competition between telecommunications companies where it drives down prices, but we need anti-trust regulation where they acquire monopolies)...
I'm neither capitalist nor a socialist; environment and circumstance can make either strategy more plausibly efficient than the other and there are many complex areas of society in which different approaches are warranted.
Quoting Ram
What role is that?
Telling people what to do? Justifying the things people do?
Reason can show people how to get what they want, but it cannot originate the want (neither could god though)... You will have to refine the question...
Reason alone cannot found an ethical framework (at some point we need to invoke emotional preference and desire) and pure socialism is a 20 year old's delusion.
If you find it disappointing that many philosophers don't believe in god, why?
Maybe something about exploring philosophy tends to leave religious commitment less intact?
"Maybe something about exploring philosophy tends to leave religious commitment less intact?"
Maybe having religious commitment less intact leads one to explore philosophy. "Nature abhors a vacuum".
I don't need to refine the OP. You've initiated a dialogue and that I think is what an OP should lead to.
I don't think I've said anything in this thread that I'm for or against philosophers being atheists who tend towards socialism. I was simply curious if people here are oriented in that direction.
I believe in God but I don't view "philosophers" as a barometer of truth.
What "philosophers" believe I think depends on who controls the institutions.
I think Socrates was a sort of heretic, Plato was a sort of heretic and so naturally their children tend towards being heretics. I don't particularly admire Socrates, I think he probably had it coming. Nor do I admire philosophy. I don't view philosophy as this lofty thing or have a lofty view of it. People lose their faith and seek to fill a void. Thus philosophy.
But that's another discussion. I was just curious if people here tend to be atheists with socialist tendencies.
You, I see, are an atheist but favor a mixed economy if I'm not mistaken. I am curious though if this forum is mostly left/liberal.
You say Reason can't dictate ends. You say God can't either. Of course, this is false. God can most certainly send Prophets (PBUH) with commandments on stone tablets coming down mountain-tops.
You don't believe Reason can send prophets down mountaintops with commandments on stone tablets? I agree but I think Plato thought otherwise. The Marxists too. I think there have indeed been many who thought and think such.
If Reason cannot dictate ends- what dictates ends according to you?
I said refine the question.
What is the role traditionally played by god?
Quoting Ram
O.K... That seems a bit harsh...
Quoting Ram
Philosophy is more than just filling our many and differently shaped god-holes....
What happens when two people both claim to have the word of god but disagree about what god's word actually is?
Quoting Ram
Well I deeply desire to go on living (but not at any cost). I have a great deal of empathy for my friends and family, and even strangers who I will never meet. I want the world to be a place filled with life and happiness as opposed to death and suffering, and so my actions in life are oriented around enjoying it, and helping others to enjoy it too.
Well, according to you philosophy is not about filling a vacuum. I believe otherwise. That's not ALL it is. But I do think it's an aspect. I think those who get really, really into philosophy who don't believe in religion.... I think those people were probably lacking in religiosity to begin with, had doubts, etc. I think they were already oriented in that direction.
Quoting VagabondSpectre
You want me to elaborate. Okay.
I give examples- traditionally, God dictates our ends. God tells us what's right and wrong.
You have rightly denied that Reason can determine our Ends. If only you could give Sam Harris a talking-to....
Anyways.......
Quoting VagabondSpectre
The Athenians didn't think so.
Quoting VagabondSpectre
It varies. It can involve a quiet disagreement. It can involve arrows, swords, bullets, etc.
Same as when people have beliefs regarding anythingQuoting VagabondSpectre
This is tragic and I think you know it on some level. You need God. Life needs to have meaning.
Feelings (empathy in this example) and desire can't give life meaning. We need our Creator. Humans can disagree on their theological beliefs and it can get ugly but we nevertheless must seek connection with God.
No, not exactly. When two people disagree about pumpkin-spice lattes, it's highly unlikely that it will ever come to arrows. When the most grandiose imaginable purpose/ends are at stake, people seem much more willing to kill for them.
Quoting Ram
What about the desire to live and to be happy among other happy humans is tragic?
Compared to your desire to go to heaven and be eternally happy perhaps?
What if you're wrong about the existence of heaven and the nature or existence of god?
I don't know. If you have an especially argumentative wife, the pumpkin-spice latte dispute could get ugly.
Okay, so you are saying when it comes to the Big Issues, people might start going at it with arrows.
So should discourse be limited to pumpkin-spice lattes? Following that logic, I think that's where it leads.
Quoting VagabondSpectre
We were made for more. We must embrace our true purpose and strive towards being God's agents on earth!!!!- as we were created to be!
Now my desire to attain Jannah..... Allah has said if I'm not mistaken that we should strive towards Jannah..... in any case from what I understand, Allah says we should strive for Jannah. So my goal should be Jannah. I want to serve Allah, I want to obey Allah.
What if I'm wrong?? What if the atheist is wrong?!
If I'm wrong... eh. I can live with non-existence. But if I'm right and the atheist is wrong....... eek.
Strange. I thought I posted a response.
Anyways, I will be very brief insha'Allah.
By the logic you are espousing, I think people will only be able to disagree on things like pumpkin-spice lattes.
I'm saying that grandiose issues can cause us to lay down our lives, so we had better be sure we're right about them before we actually pick up a sword. There's no way to know which religion is correct, so we should never pick up swords in the name of religion.
Quoting Ram
It really sounds like you desire Jannah first and foremost, and you only say that Allah wants you to pursue Jannah because that's convenient to what you already want.
Quoting Ram
Don't be so quick there. If your religion earns you an early death (as you are so ready to die) and your religion is wrong, then you will have wasted your only life and you will gain nothing. If I'm wrong, at least I still get to enjoy this life.
P.S, the odds that you are wrong are very high by the sheer number of opposing religious beliefs alone. Good luck betting your one and only life. I'll just keep mine, Pascal.
Well that is what you think. Allah knows what is in the human heart.
You don't know that. You don't know who is guided and who isn't. You not being guided doesn't mean no one is guided.
I believe that death is not the end and we shouldn't fear death. I doubt my beliefs on death alone are going to cause my life to end. Everyone is destined to die.
Just wondering
Not arguing
Just curious
You're familiar, I take it, with those militant atheists who, under the pretense of curiosity, coyly bait theists into making explicit the reasoning behind their thoughts. They do this, the atheists, because they are quite confident that once their opponent's reasoning is made explicit, the absurdity of that reasoning will be laid bare. Then, dropping the pretense, they, the atheists, will be able to pounce.
You're also familiar, I take it, with the idea that the militant atheist's mode of interacting with theists is driven by insecurity, resentment and rage. For people so ostensibly over a theistic way of life, they seem obsessively drawn to it, as though driven by a compulsion to stand defiantly in front of it and assert their freedom.
And you can understand, I hope, the suggestion that this whole way of interacting smacks violently of deep insecurity. Only someone who is at some level deeply unsure of their beliefs will be drawn so acutely, and so helplessly, toward this kind of confrontation.
For the most part, Islam didn't need evangelists, though. People were drawn effortlessly to its beauty.
I believe the role of God as ultimate authority and the role of religion as a source of shared meaning can't be replaced by reason, and that the result of attempting to do so is what's known as rationalization. A treatment for this disease might be found in aesthetics of some kind.
No.
OK. I adhere to different views.