The concept of God in Western thought

[angellous_evangellous]

I found some useful webpages that I would like to pass along...

Western Concepts of God [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] - It would be much better if there were actual references...

Teleological Arguments for God's Existence (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) - this one looks good

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

People would do well to read your second reference and actually try to understand it.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

From Teleological Arguments For God's Existence: "The mind in question, being prior to nature itself, is typically taken to be supernatural."

I really like that, taken both in context and out of context!

 

[doppelganger]

People would do well to read your second reference and actually try to understand it.

The only problem is that it tends to further the error that teleology connected to "God" belief is somehow ontological in scope, distracting from the fact that teleology necessarily points to the belief state of the observer and the function of the observer's own mental process in making judgments about "design." It's at that latter level that these design and "First Cause" arguments fall apart.

 

[Malach1]

You know angelous the concept of God, Gods or a god is not a matter of philosophy but one of religion-
Scientificly- if there is a "GOD' we are not aware of "GOD"

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You know angelous the concept of God, Gods or a god is not a matter of philosophy but one of religion-
Scientificly- if there is a "GOD' we are not aware of "GOD"

The question of God is and has been a philosophical question since the beginning of philosophy.

 

[Malach1]

Then Philosophy is a vain thing and I will have no part of it- For how can man reason about that which he is not aware of- tell me angelous

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Then Philosophy is a vain thing and I will have no part of it- For how can man reason about that which he is not aware of- tell me angelous

That almost goes without saying...

If you had read the links that I had provided, and understood them, you might have posted something more insightful.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The only problem is that it tends to further the error that teleology connected to "God" belief is somehow ontological in scope, distracting from the fact that teleology necessarily points to the belief state of the observer and the function of the observer's own mental process in making judgments about "design." It's at that latter level that these design and "First Cause" arguments fall apart.

Existentialist coated existentialism with existentialist filling.

 

[doppelganger]

Then Philosophy is a vain thing and I will have no part of it- For how can man reason about that which he is not aware of- tell me angelous

All is vanity, dude - including "religion." You'd know that if you studied philosophy (even as much of it as can be gleaned from reading the Bible).

 

[doppelganger]

Existentialist coated existentialism with existentialist filling.

Yum. And you can wash it down with cup of coffee. No need to say "existentialist coffee" because all coffee is existentialist.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Yum. And you can wash it down with cup of coffee. No need to say "existentialist coffee" because all coffee is existentialist.

I'm going to go lay down on my lawn and look at the clouds.:yes:

 

[doppelganger]

I'm going to go lay down on my lawn and look at the clouds.:yes:

Isn't that what you do in class?

 

[Malach1]

Religion is vain to but God is its greatest creation- and if the Collective Anima of world consciousness believes in a God or a being like a God- then this creation has purpose I cannot say the same of Philosophy

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Isn't that what you do in class?

No, I post on RF. :angel2:

 

[doppelganger]

Religion is vain to [sic] but God is its greatest creation-

Thanks for your refreshing honesty.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Thanks for your refreshing honesty.

I find it coincidental.

 

[doppelganger]

I find it coincidental.

But if you don't reward good behavior, it won't be repeated.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

But if you don't reward good behavior, it won't be repeated.

Even if it's an accident? :biglaugh:

 

[doppelganger]

Even if it's an accident? :biglaugh:

Yup. Classics in the History of Psychology -- Skinner (1948)