Mariner

You were probably using a different name then (I searched all of my comments for an interaction with you and didn't find it; perhaps the search was in...

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4209/what-are-gods

Well, I won't explain what you mean by the words you are using. So no circle here. Only a full stop.

You objected to what I was asking (not "saying") and said you lacked patience for it. If you have grown more patient in the meantime, all you have to ...

Yep, it would. But S was not interested in it. I haven't posted it yet (it requires some thought as to the best approach; I think I'll go with histori...

I will open a new thread to answer this. It would be off-topic gere.

Ok. Funny post, by the way.

If there was any such suggestion it was unintentional. (And I was trying to insert caveats all along the way to prevent or minimize that interpretatio...

- S, you are talking about dogs, but I don't know what you mean by the word. What is a dog? - I'm flexible. There is no set meaning for 'dog' that I a...

I was not expecting to catch anything. I wanted to know what you meant by the sentence I highlighted. I still do. Let me know if you want to explain i...

I don't know if I agree or not with you, since I don't know what you mean by the word "god". To keep up with the meme theme (if only because it is a n...

Unified by an underlying commonality. Sure. But the question "what are gods?" is about this common trait of gods (and equivalent beings), not about an...

I agree. But "I don't give a damn about whether or not God exists" is not the same thing as "God? What is that?" (with or without the shrug). The firs...

I am not talking about religion. But I repeat myself. The subject of atheist's curiosity (or lack of it) is, if you recall, "God? What is that? Never ...

Sure. It is perfectly fine. But it is not a stance informed by curiosity (even though it is perfectly fine). And if a forum member started to talk abo...

You are talking about religion. The word was not used by me in this thread, and it is not what I'm talking about. Nothing. I never said it was exempt....

Vou are assuming that I am lamenting a decline in belief, and in reaction to that vou are indulging in Internet clichés. If I was lamenting something,...

Cute. But wholly imaginary. Quips are the best that atheists can come up with. Not that this is their exclusive fault -- theists can be very annoying ...

This sounds more like curiosity than indifference. Unfortunately, it is the kind of response that is much too rare among atheists. They are so very su...

Neither. It is ambiguous. "Snow" is being used as a phenomenological category rather than as the name of a substance. It is like stepping on a very ea...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Retrieving-Nicaea-Development-Trinitarian-Doctrine-ebook/dp/B005GMY9X6 This is a good book about the subject.

This issue also bothered Tolkien. When he began to write his stories, in his teenage years, the bad guys were modeled after the bad guys in his belove...

In the old PF I received some PM's about having changed some hearts. In the main, they were about how I opened their eyes to a different way of lookin...

Unfortunately the best works that I know of are in Portuguese. "Pitágoras e o Tema do Número" and "Platão: o Um e o Múltiplo". Fantastic works. Perhap...

I don't think that God exists in a similar sense that justice, truth, beauty etc. exist. Those are merely examples to underline the point that "X exis...

At some point we will have to point at something and say, "This is the fundamental block. It cannot be explained by recourse to something else. If you...

At the basis of all three there is experience. (This is not a disagreement. It is just an observation that explains how one can transition from one mo...

Mostly, it is that the answer to this question (sorry to sound so Clintonian) hinges on the meaning of the word "exists". God certainly exists if this...

Precisely. They are different, which is not a reason to consider one of them more fundamental than the other, to try to reduce one to the other, or to...

Would you apply this reasoning to "justice", "beauty", "knowledge", "virtue", etc? None of them can be comprehended in a material/physical sense, but ...

Yep, I see no problem with that assertion (and neither do the major tradition religions, including Christianity). It is important to observe that God ...

What does "material comprehension" mean? I am not familiar with that expression.

The dictionary is a good first step. Merriam-Webster: Definition of transcendent 1 a : exceeding usual limits : surpassing b : extending or lying beyo...

That is precisely the issue. When A says that X is "not real, whether it be transcendent or not", he is presupposing a notion of "reality" that R disa...

But all the major religions agree that we should not be able to sense God. In other words, this objection is talking about something other than "the m...

Ah, Schopenhauer, the World as Will and Representation... not the only work of his that I have read, but the only major work. What would you say it co...

The lungs are not separate from me, I am not separate from other beings, they are not separate from the lungs, the breath that was being exhaled centu...

Haven't been able to find an online available version of "Philosophizing the Double-Bind". Pity.

@"StreetlightX", it wasn't a reproach, or a critique. It was more of an analysis, or an inquiry. Indeed, inasmuch as I know what Nietzsche is criticiz...

Thanks for both replies, but the problem is still not addressed (perhaps not even recognized). Immanence is a meaningless concept without the concept ...

How can one "affirm the joyful immanence of this world" without acknowledging the transcendent? Not a rhetorical question. I'm curious to hear more ab...

If "to know that one knows" means "to be conscious that one knows" (which is how I would interpret it), then the principle would apparently deny the p...

And this different way, what would it be? Circular, infinite regression, or a definitive conclusion? ;)

The "you can" in this sequence is about capability, not about reasonableness. Sure, you can question anything, but should you? If we ignore this aspec...

The foundation (or ground) is not a given. It must be discovered. But once it is discovered, it is final (if it is indeed the ground of the issue). Th...

When there are no further questions to be answered, isn't this finality? And what would be the alternative?

It just shifts the locus of the ultimate ground (even apart from any criticisms of it). How is (3) not a case of a "satisfying finality"? What would b...

If you are interested in the science rather than the philosophy or the "pop-sci" approach, the best bet is a textbook. 20 years ago we used Douglas Fu...

I say that God's judgment is necessary (i.e. non-contingent), but that this does not reduce his freedom or his dignity. God cannot condone evil, becau...

The concepts under discussion really need some refinement. Liberty, judgment, God, man, are being used as polemical placeholders rather than as tools ...