Intellectual Bankruptcy

[Nick Soapdish]

Since the enlightenment, we have seen a fascinating development of Western philosophy. The landscape is dominated by the transition from Christianity to deism, to naturalism, to nihilism, to existentialism, to postmodernism.

We are now left in a world where the dominant philosophy tells us the greatest virtue is to be tolerant of everyone and that everyone's beliefs are equal.

It is a world in which we are discouraged from any sort of confrontation by taking a stand for what you believe in.

It is a world in which the value of a belief or idea is measured by how useful it is.

These ideas are predicated on a deep philosophical development that started with the rejection of special revelation (the idea that knowledge can be given to us directly from God). It seems that once special revelation is rejected, we are left with these conclusions:

- No one owns the truth--absolute truth cannot be known. Yet, how can we know this?

- All notions of metaphysics are fantasies--stories that are useful for making us feel better. Yet, that is a metaphysical statement.

- People believe what they believe because it suits them. Yet, a person can only believe that if it suits them.

What a pit of contradiction and inconsistency.

Has philosophy reached a state of intellectual bankruptcy? What happened to having a philosophical bedrock from which we can build our lives with the bricks of reason?

 

[BFD_Zayl]

whooooweee!! I have no idea what you just said but MAN it sure did sound smart!! I'm last of a dying breed i'm afraid...I take a stand for what I believe in,if someone challenges it.

 

[OneoftheLost]

Wow. Im not going to lie here. I only faintly understood what you just wrote. As such I will try to post a response.

You suggest Phillisophical Bankrupcy...I think that you are referring to the fact that we seem to have stopped looking for phillisophical truths because society deems it worthless due to the fact that certain people see that people like socretes said something along the lines of absolute truth cannot be known. I dunno, Im tired and it doesnt really make sense to me, but if that is what you mean, I believe its because modern society sees it as useless, why sit around and philosiphize (Wow, I butchered that....) when you can be doing something?

Again, that is my tentative answer, maybe someone with a bit better knowledge on the subject can translate this for me?

 

[Nick Soapdish]

I'm sorry... there are some complex ideas in this argument and it is really tough to try to summarize them in a forum post that isn't too long for people to read. Please let me know if any statement needs clarification.

 

[Papersock]

I hope I'm understanding what you're saying.

Since the enlightenment, we have seen a fascinating development of Western philosophy. The landscape is dominated by the transition from Christianity to deism, to naturalism, to nihilism, to existentialism, to postmodernism.

We are now left in a world where the dominant philosophy tells us the greatest virtue is to be tolerant of everyone and that everyone's beliefs are equal.

As long as they are not hurting anyone, or hinder someone else's free will.

It is a world in which we are discouraged from any sort of confrontation by taking a stand for what you believe in.

We are? Are you saying no one is allowed to stand for what they believe in?

It is a world in which the value of a belief or idea is measured by how useful it is.

Or how logical it is or based on actual evidence, or reality.

These ideas are predicated on a deep philosophical development that started with the rejection of special revelation (the idea that knowledge can be given to us directly from God). It seems that once special revelation is rejected, we are left with these conclusions:

- No one owns the truth--absolute truth cannot be known. Yet, how can we know this?

It kind of depends on what you mean by "the truth." There are certain facts of reality that exist no mater what you believe is true or not.

- All notions of metaphysics are fantasies--stories that are useful for making us feel better. Yet, that is a metaphysical statement.

And doesn't it make some people feel better?

- People believe what they believe because it suits them. Yet, a person can only believe that if it suits them.

I'm not so sure we choose what we believe or cannot believe. To a dagree, I suppose. But for me, I can't believe in something that doesn't have good evidence.

What a pit of contradiction and inconsistency.

Has philosophy reached a state of intellectual bankruptcy? What happened to having a philosophical bedrock from which we can build our lives with the bricks of reason?

It seems to me that we do still have a philosophical bedrock and reason, only its based on observation of what works and what doesn't. History, and logic...

Bleh, I'm having a hard time putting words to my thoughts.

 

[PeaceSeeker]

Bleh, I'm having a hard time putting words to my thoughts.

You've expressed yourself very well...and logically.

In this 21st Century, the Age of Technology, we are still plagued by religious beliefs that are a contributing cause toward terrorism, killings and wars between nations. Belief in a deity, who keeps causing catastrophes, punishes people, and created the universe out of nothingness as if by magic was brought about by hysteria and superstitions. This thought process needs to be reassessed and brought up to date. Open-minded people must use common sense to determine whether this so-called deity was incorrectly perceived, misinterpreted and misunderstood by the masses of a bygone era.

If belief in God goes against God's laws of nature, its creation was based on superstitions. True spirituality conforms to the laws of nature.

 

[PeaceSeeker]

What a pit of contradiction and inconsistency.

Has philosophy reached a state of intellectual bankruptcy? What happened to having a philosophical bedrock from which we can build our lives with the bricks of reason?

Ahem...Do you consider Christianity the philosophical bedrock from which we can build our lives with the bricks of reason?...the Christianity that promotes prejudice?

 

[Ody]

**** continental philosophy.

That is all.

 

[Aasimar]

Not a very useful contribution, but someone may find this humorous. I always wondered about the term metaphysics, and why it isn't applied to only selective branches of science. I personally would like to meet a someone versed in metageometry. Just playing with English

 

[Ody]

It is a world in which we are discouraged from any sort of confrontation by taking a stand for what you believe in.
Wrong.

It is a world in which the value of a belief or idea is measured by how useful it is.
How useful it, APPEARS TO BE!

What a pit of contradiction and inconsistency. Similar to most of modern theism.

how i shot red?

 

[Ody]

True spirituality conforms to the laws of nature.

Spirituality is absurd. So is any real consideration of the issue when you think about it.

 

[zenzero]

Friend,
Philosophy is a study
Any study is using the MINd.
religion is just a WAy
a way to still/quieten that very mind.
The sooner the mind becomes bankrupt the better it is as then all men will again be in harmony with nature/creation/garden of eden.
Love & rgds

 

[Ody]

religion is just a WAy
a way to still/quieten that very mind.

A foolish bet... how we find necessary comfort in that I will never know.

 

[PeaceSeeker]

I always wondered about the term metaphysics, and why it isn't applied to only selective branches of science.

Metaphysics is the highest form of philosophy, which attempts to gain knowledge of the ideas. Because the traditional, speculative perspective fails to succeed in this task, Kant suggests a new, hypothetical perspective for metaphysics. Metaphysics can succeed only when it is preceded by Critique.

 

[PeaceSeeker]

Spirituality is absurd. So is any real consideration of the issue when you think about it.

Spirituality is basically consciousness.

 

[Ody]

Spirituality is basically consciousness.

....

 

[PureX]

Since the enlightenment, we have seen a fascinating development of Western philosophy. The landscape is dominated by the transition from Christianity to deism, to naturalism, to nihilism, to existentialism, to postmodernism.

We are now left in a world where the dominant philosophy tells us the greatest virtue is to be tolerant of everyone and that everyone's beliefs are equal.

It is a world in which we are discouraged from any sort of confrontation by taking a stand for what you believe in.

It is a world in which the value of a belief or idea is measured by how useful it is.

These ideas are predicated on a deep philosophical development that started with the rejection of special revelation (the idea that knowledge can be given to us directly from God). It seems that once special revelation is rejected, we are left with these conclusions:

- No one owns the truth--absolute truth cannot be known. Yet, how can we know this?

- All notions of metaphysics are fantasies--stories that are useful for making us feel better. Yet, that is a metaphysical statement.

- People believe what they believe because it suits them. Yet, a person can only believe that if it suits them.

What a pit of contradiction and inconsistency.

Has philosophy reached a state of intellectual bankruptcy? What happened to having a philosophical bedrock from which we can build our lives with the bricks of reason?

Actually, none of those statements are self-contradictory.

- No one owns the truth--absolute truth cannot be known. Yet, how can we know this?

We can't. Which supports the original proposition. The statement: "No one owns the truth--absolute truth cannot be known" is not an absolute statement, as you are trying to imply. The truth this statement is proposing is dependent upon what humans can know. And a truth that depends upon the human condition cannot be an absolute truth. An absolute truth would have to be true regardless of the human condition, in which case humans wouldn't be able to know it.

- All notions of metaphysics are fantasies--stories that are useful for making us feel better. Yet, that is a metaphysical statement.

No, that is not a metaphysical statement. It's a statement about metaphysics. Statements about a subject do not automatically become that subject. A statement about the weather, for example, does not become part of the weather. A statement about God, does not become divine simply because it's about a divine concept. A statement about truth does not become true simply because it's about truth.

- People believe what they believe because it suits them. Yet, a person can only believe that if it suits them.

The first part of this statement does not automatically lead us to the second. To claim that, "People believe what they want to believe because it suits them" does not necessarily imply the claim that all people do so all the time. For you to draw that conclusion from this statement without it having been expressed in such absolute terms is to in fact do what the statement claims people do. Yet the statement itself is not absolute, and so does not necessarily include itself as you are implying.

It's not philosophy that has become bankrupt, or is failing in some way. It's America's educational system, that no longer teaches it's citizens how to think critically, and honestly, and skeptically about their own ideas, and the ideas of others. Everything in our culture has become a commodity for sale, including honesty and skepticism. Ideas are now being sold to whoever is willing to buy them, regardless of their logic, rationale, or truthfulness. And teaching the consumer public how to think critically is now viewed by the policy-makers (and the profiteers that control them) as being bad for business. Not to mention it's being bad for the policy-makers, themselves, who can stay in power much more easily without a critically thoughtful voting public.

 

[Sunstone]

- No one owns the truth--absolute truth cannot be known. Yet, how can we know this?

- All notions of metaphysics are fantasies--stories that are useful for making us feel better. Yet, that is a metaphysical statement.

- People believe what they believe because it suits them. Yet, a person can only believe that if it suits them.

What a pit of contradiction and inconsistency.

Has philosophy reached a state of intellectual bankruptcy? What happened to having a philosophical bedrock from which we can build our lives with the bricks of reason?

Your characterizations of various philosophical positions seem to be strawmen. More over, the Strawman fallacy is still a fallacy of logic, no matter how many changes there have been in philosophy over the last 500 or so years.

 

[logician]

We''re only beginning to come out of the dark ages of ancient religious traditions and into the age of reason. Until politicians can boldly claim their atheism, and have a change to get elected, we'll remain in the dark ages.

 

[Nick Soapdish]

Hi Papersock, I think I understand what you are saying.

We are? Are you saying no one is allowed to stand for what they believe in?

Yes, because my truth has nothing to do with your truth so I have no right to act on my truth with you if it disagrees with your taste.

Or how logical it is or based on actual evidence, or reality.

Whose reality? When we are talking about personal beliefs and world views, "actual evidence" usually doesn't settle anything.

It kind of depends on what you mean by "the truth." There are certain facts of reality that exist no mater what you believe is true or not.

I agree, but from what I understand, that is not in agreement with postmodernism. No one can own the judgment of what is deemed real vs illusion, or what the correct standard is for declaring something absolutely true.