No, animals are not innocent in the proper sense. Innocent is only the one who can become guilty. Animals cannot do that. They are beyond guilt and in...
Innocence does not always equal innocence. There is the more metaphorical innocence of the animal, and there is the moral innocence of a person. The i...
Procreation first leads to a not yet fully developed person. And only a fully developed person is a person in the strict and actual sense. A not yet f...
@"Magnus" What @"Nickolasgaspar" says is correct.That's why Craig has to extend the argument further. And the subsequent lines of argument are controv...
I don't know if it's been mentioned here before, but the topic reminds me strongly of a passage at the end of Voltaire's book Candide: "one day the ol...
I never took that as a serious concrete example. I don't think it's meant to be taken literally. It is rather a mere illustration, a figuration or sym...
One could perhaps say that Prauss has approached Aristotle and somehow finds himself between Kant and Aristotle. Prauss is, after all, like Aristotle ...
Not a Cartesian Dualist. Rather something like a property dualist, or Aristotelian form-matter dualism. Here is what Prauss thinks about this, though ...
That is a good question. To answer it, I would have to read Prauss in more detail. As far as I know, Prauss says that one cannot derive an ought from ...
To avoid misunderstanding. I mean this, that one literally dies for the other, as in martyrdom. Because in a certain sense, one certainly has to sacri...
Would you admit that Prauss is at least a scintilla more convincing here than Kant? Or what do you think of Kant's idea of the universalizability of m...
I'll try to be more precise about your points now. To help me better understand your position, you seem to take the role of a moral nihilist (nothing ...
Prauss would deny that his theory is natural law because no ought arises from nature. But if one understands very generally the ability of consciousne...
You're probably right. I didn't think that precisely about the title and simply identified the ethical and moral, which in the Kantian context, as you...
How can you be so sure? And if it were so, one would have to question every prescriptive moral theory. One must then not be afraid of doing so. I have...
I think that's the open question, whether God even wants other things as well. He might also want to be alone. According to the presented argument, ho...
That's a good point. But I think the omnibenevolence is there, as noted in my answer before (https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/657003)...
In this model of God, omnibenevolence is always directed first at itself: “In willing himself primarily, he wills all other things” (Aquinas SCG, 1.75...
In principle, yes. World 1 = God is alone World 2 = God exists alongside a creation which has imperfections like temporality, spatial extension. World...
I did not mean to object to Moore. Bartricks was meant. But you're right, even Suarez would eventually be subject to Moore's criticism that God might ...
In this respect, he @"Bartricks" sees his philosophy in agreement with that of Ockham: This is what Ockham's moral theory says: The last sentence is c...
A translation into English could appear at the end of the year if all goes well. But probably more likely next year. My motivation was actually to str...
If you want to read more about Mainländer, you can find sources here: T. Whittaker - review. In: Mind. A quarterly review of Psychology and Philosophy...
Yes, more of a metaphor. He uses the Kantian regulative as-if language. As if there was an intention of self-destruction. But since in the Philosophy ...
The idea I presented is more or less from a German philosopher named Peter Bieri. An answer should be in the following translated passage of that same...
Yes, that is also what I think. In a way, a Hegelian synthesis of the thesis theism and the antithesis atheism. His afterlife takes place in or with t...
Okay, I agree, personal interest plays a big role. But what do you do when someone confronts you with Christianity? At a party during small talk, or c...
You may have already asked in the past in one form or another and found every answer lacking. But if you had never dealt with Christianity before? Giv...
I think one should take a closer look at Kastrup's arguments leading to this thesis. It is a bold thesis, and he alone bears the burden of proof. But ...
That's also a good question. But I would put it in third place. The questions I mention are probably more for one's own intellectual conscience and in...
If there is no real death and no hell, then there would be nothing to care about. If one believes in objective morality, that is, moral realism, then ...
@"javi2541997" @"kudos" I completely agree with what you are saying. My point was probably that one also protects oneself emotionally against simplist...
Discussions like ours have been going on forever. I have tried to argue from a naturalistic approach: The following quotes on the late medieval and ea...
I dispute this premise because it seems to me to be ontologically ambiguous. Here, the mundane reason of everyone can be meant (every human being is e...
How so? You seem to be hypersensitive when asked specific questions to understand your moral philosophy. So far, I have not made my moral philosophy e...
You definitely have a faculty of reason, even if sometimes, for example in sleep, you do not use it so that it lies dormant in potentiality, so to spe...
Okay, now I understand your reasoning. I would deny that. There is a multitude and plurality of sources. These are namely the many individual rational...
One problem with materialism is contained in Lenin's statement "that, with every great scientific discovery, the definition of materialism changes rad...
Francisco Suárez (1548—1617) would argue "that for a law to be genuine law and not just law in name it must be grounded in the legislative act of a su...
I do not see at least at first sight the valid logical jump from 1, 2 and 3 to 4 and 5. Because in 1, 2 and 3 also a mundane reason and a mundane mind...
Comments