Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bill Snedden · 03-21-2002, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malaclypse the Younger:
<strong>You are a theist; quelle suprise.</strong>

Ummm...UIVMM, Laurentius is either atheist or agnostic. He lists his beliefs as "Secular Humanist."

Bill

Laurentius · 03-23-2002, 03:13 AM

Malaclypse the Yonger

Quote:

Of course, christianity is not the only alternative to atheism. Creation of paradise on earth is fundamentally humanist, and there are religious as well as secular humanists.

Athough Marx started his writings from his discontent with the work conditions of the working people in the area under the influence of Christianity, we can of course assume that he refers to all kinds of labor: European, American, African, Asian and Australian equally. Religions vary greatly, but they all value spirituality at the expense of earthly, material experience. All religions use (more or less) the theme of a Golden Age when life and the creation were paradisiac (perfect), and since when Man's condition has been degrading continuously. No religious view would agree with the possibility of a materially determined, non-divine paradise. Marx would. (Religious marxism is another case of social aberration we'll always be witness to and which has nothing to do with logic and rationality.)

Quote:

But I do agree with your implicit statement of christian values and I see this as a damning indictment of those values. By rejecting paradise (on moral grounds), they are accepting suffering. And how does one reason from the proposition that suffering is preferable to fulfillment and then reject that one should thus cause suffering? This contradiction seems to pervade christian thought and ethics.

Not that I would disagree with the conclusion of your acid comments (I am often cynical myself), but my genereal attitude toward believers is one of tolerance and respect. Debatable though it may seem, my position reads as follows: strong wrong principles are preferable to no principles at all. I personally find easier to deal with people who hold a creed than with those for whom nothing really matters.

Quote:

We hit the intersubjective... an area of fuzziness between the objective and the subjective.

Certainly shared values are "objective" in the sense that they exist outside any one individual's mind. However, they are "subjective" in that they are properties of minds, not of objective reality.

In one sense a particular truth is "objective" because it is true regardless of what anyone believes; such a sense obviously excludes intersubjective values. Additionally, a sense of objectivity is that one cannot affect that truth by one's belief; intersubjectivity cannot be known except by knowing actual subjective belief; it is just the idea that our subjective beliefs are affected by what other subjectively believe. Nothing about subjectivity entails that subjective beliefs cannot be extrinsically affected.

Intersubjectivity sounds like an interesting and meaningful concept but only as long as it is a subcategory of objectivity. Man distinguishes himself from animals through reason, and reason is carried out through mental manipulation of abstract constructs, all of which are inherited from pre-existing generations. These notions are passed over in integrative structures and systems in which they form complicated nets and hierarchies that one cannot modify at will. Thus, it is they that can be said to create Man, not the other way around.

The immutability and matrix property of culture renders it objective.
AVE

[ March 23, 2002: Message edited by: Laurentius ]</p>

Ierrellus · 03-23-2002, 04:24 AM

Is Randal Bradley"s premise of a "philosophical wasteland" being proved here in arguments about what is subjective and what is objective? Is philosophy a place where antinomies are made, not born; and where, once polarities are established, the only course left open is the relativistic hinterland between the poles?

Ierellus

Laurentius · 03-23-2002, 04:31 AM

Ierrellus

Quote:

Is Randal Bradley"s premise of a "philosophical wasteland" being proved here in arguments about what is subjective and what is objective? Is philosophy a place where antinomies are made, not born; and where, once polarities are established, the only course left open is the relativistic hinterland between the poles?

Questions, questions, questions.

For the author the absolute subjectivity of values is of crucial importance.

Antinomies are fundamental to knowledge; one cannot learn "black" in the absence of "white", "A" in the absence of "non-A".
AVE

Ierrellus · 03-23-2002, 06:28 AM

Dear Laurentius,

One last gadfly question, please. What are the possibilities of infra-black and ultra-white?

Ierrellus

Laurentius · 03-23-2002, 11:53 AM

Ierrellus: What are the possibilities of infra-black and ultra-white?

Me: I don't know. The "Black & White" game maybe. What are you getting at? Or you're not getting anywhere?

[ March 23, 2002: Message edited by: Laurentius ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-23-2002, 04:24 AM	#23
Ierrellus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 2,082	Is Randal Bradley"s premise of a "philosophical wasteland" being proved here in arguments about what is subjective and what is objective? Is philosophy a place where antinomies are made, not born; and where, once polarities are established, the only course left open is the relativistic hinterland between the poles? Ierellus

03-23-2002, 06:28 AM	#25
Ierrellus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 2,082	Dear Laurentius, One last gadfly question, please. What are the possibilities of infra-black and ultra-white? Ierrellus

03-23-2002, 11:53 AM	#26
Laurentius Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Lucky Bucky, Oz Posts: 5,645	Ierrellus: What are the possibilities of infra-black and ultra-white? Me: I don't know. The "Black & White" game maybe. What are you getting at? Or you're not getting anywhere? [ March 23, 2002: Message edited by: Laurentius ]</p>

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.