Comments for Philo Agora http://philoagora.wordpress.com Sydney's Philosophy in the Cafe Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:18:12 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Cioran – Kees Bakhuyzen by Steven Schwarz http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/cioran-kees-bakhuyzen/#comment-180 Steven Schwarz Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:18:12 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/cioran-kees-bakhuyzen/#comment-180 mmm, interesting. I had never heard of Cioran before reading this post. I've got to say though that despair and desperation and alienation and misanthropy are flavours I grew bored with some time ago. But that's probably a very glib and empty view based on nothing (having already admitted to being unfamiliar with Cioran) other than my own self importance. I think there is a way though whereby everything can be reconciled with everything else. Whereby the illusion of difference can be dispelled. As the buddhist said to the hotdog vendor: "make me one with everything". <a href="http://metaphysics-srs.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">mumbo jumbo</a> mmm, interesting. I had never heard of Cioran before reading this post. I’ve got to say though that despair and desperation and alienation and misanthropy are flavours I grew bored with some time ago. But that’s probably a very glib and empty view based on nothing (having already admitted to being unfamiliar with Cioran) other than my own self importance.

I think there is a way though whereby everything can be reconciled with everything else. Whereby the illusion of difference can be dispelled. As the buddhist said to the hotdog vendor: “make me one with everything”.

mumbo jumbo

]]> Comment on Dawkins on God – Peter Bowden by Nancy http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/dawkins-on-god-peter-bowden/#comment-130 Nancy Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:49:43 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/dawkins-on-god-peter-bowden/#comment-130 N @ 1:59 stated; "This is strange logic. Are you suggesting that there is a god simply because many people believe there to be one? The popularity of belief is spectacularly unrelated to the truth or falsity of the contents of such a belief. You may not like Dawkins’ argument, but reaching for Aquinas “there must be a beginning to things” is really scraping the bottom of the barrel." Where in my comments do I make the alleged suggestion you state above that God exists purely because many people believe? Please quote from my comments the exact statements you rely upon in making this claim? In relation to "scraping the bottom of the barrel" comment, does this also apply to scientific theories which claim evolution resumed with expanding cells, or big bang theory that started the ball rolling? I am unclear as to the reasons for your objections that there may be a start to everything? On a more related matter, I do not believe the concept of metaphysics was strange or merely act of desparation for Plato or early philosophers (including, but not limited to pre-socratic writers). Therefore, I am unclear as to the reasons behind your comments, which by the way, appear to be unjustified, unsubstentiated and more subjective. Look forward to receiving your response. Cheers, Nancy N @ 1:59 stated;

“This is strange logic. Are you suggesting that there is a god simply because many people believe there to be one? The popularity of belief is spectacularly unrelated to the truth or falsity of the contents of such a belief. You may not like Dawkins’ argument, but reaching for Aquinas “there must be a beginning to things” is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.”

Where in my comments do I make the alleged suggestion you state above that God exists purely because many people believe? Please quote from my comments the exact statements you rely upon in making this claim?

In relation to “scraping the bottom of the barrel” comment, does this also apply to scientific theories which claim evolution resumed with expanding cells, or big bang theory that started the ball rolling? I am unclear as to the reasons for your objections that there may be a start to everything?

On a more related matter, I do not believe the concept of metaphysics was strange or merely act of desparation for Plato or early philosophers (including, but not limited to pre-socratic writers). Therefore, I am unclear as to the reasons behind your comments, which by the way, appear to be unjustified, unsubstentiated and more subjective. Look forward to receiving your response. Cheers, Nancy

]]> Comment on Dawkins on God – Peter Bowden by Nancy http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/dawkins-on-god-peter-bowden/#comment-121 Nancy Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:49:14 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/dawkins-on-god-peter-bowden/#comment-121 In relation to Dawkins comments about God in the bible - who His mercy, grace and love seems to be somehow measured by the inability of man to behave in a godly manner - I state the following clarifications: Christians believe that the scriptures are the inspired word of God; However, we also believe that it is a book of history(Chronicles), literature (Psalms, Songs of Solomon, Proverbs), Science, as well as other faculties; The acts of man such as Lot and even King David who killed his army official to marry his wife, are not indicative of God's nature. On the contrary, such events are stated because they occured and they are indicative of man's nature as it is contrasted with God's Holy and faultless essence; The Old Testemant (OT) demonstrates man's shortcomings in light of God's Holiness - The Law; The New Testemant (NT) shows God's grace to mankind despite man's shortcomings - the NT of love and grace; To not be able to understand the context of the scriptures and draw the destinctions needed, causes confusion and dismay; Such unsubstentiated and subjective narratives that aim at pushing certain agendas, and are not well studied nor examined by philosophers present an inaccurate account of the meaning of God in Christianity; I believe that it may be worth while that prior to making inaccurate claims on such matters, which are outside of the scope of certain faculty, to consult the experts - meaning any christian who bothers to search the scriptures (not nominal christians); and Christ said in John 5:39; "Search the scriptures for you believe that in it you will find eternal life, and they testify about me". Hope this sheds some light from a Christian perspective :) In relation to Dawkins comments about God in the bible – who His mercy, grace and love seems to be somehow measured by the inability of man to behave in a godly manner – I state the following clarifications:

Christians believe that the scriptures are the inspired word of God;
However, we also believe that it is a book of history(Chronicles), literature (Psalms, Songs of Solomon, Proverbs), Science, as well as other faculties;
The acts of man such as Lot and even King David who killed his army official to marry his wife, are not indicative of God’s nature. On the contrary, such events are stated because they occured and they are indicative of man’s nature as it is contrasted with God’s Holy and faultless essence;
The Old Testemant (OT) demonstrates man’s shortcomings in light of God’s Holiness – The Law;
The New Testemant (NT) shows God’s grace to mankind despite man’s shortcomings – the NT of love and grace;
To not be able to understand the context of the scriptures and draw the destinctions needed, causes confusion and dismay;
Such unsubstentiated and subjective narratives that aim at pushing certain agendas, and are not well studied nor examined by philosophers present an inaccurate account of the meaning of God in Christianity;
I believe that it may be worth while that prior to making inaccurate claims on such matters, which are outside of the scope of certain faculty, to consult the experts – meaning any christian who bothers to search the scriptures (not nominal christians); and
Christ said in John 5:39; “Search the scriptures for you believe that in it you will find eternal life, and they testify about me”.

Hope this sheds some light from a Christian perspective :)

]]> Comment on Dawkins on God – Peter Bowden by N http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/dawkins-on-god-peter-bowden/#comment-102 N Mon, 28 May 2007 13:50:57 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/28/dawkins-on-god-peter-bowden/#comment-102 This is strange logic. Are you suggesting that there is a god simply because many people believe there to be one? The popularity of belief is spectacularly unrelated to the truth or falsity of the contents of such a belief. You may not like Dawkins' argument, but reaching for Aquinas "there must be a beginning to things" is really scraping the bottom of the barrel. This is strange logic. Are you suggesting that there is a god simply because many people believe there to be one? The popularity of belief is spectacularly unrelated to the truth or falsity of the contents of such a belief. You may not like Dawkins’ argument, but reaching for Aquinas “there must be a beginning to things” is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

]]> Comment on Fear of Death and Aggression by Meaning... « rogue personality program ambour001 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/03/fear-of-death-and-aggression/#comment-57 Meaning... « rogue personality program ambour001 Thu, 03 May 2007 11:55:40 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/05/03/fear-of-death-and-aggression/#comment-57 [...] Fear of Death and Aggression - Philo Agora   … the main source of human anxieties and fear is the fact that we all subconsciously know that we are mortal… [...] [...] Fear of Death and Aggression – Philo Agora   … the main source of human anxieties and fear is the fact that we all subconsciously know that we are mortal… [...]

]]> Comment on Philo Agora 2008 by Steve Davis http://philoagora.wordpress.com#comment-16 Steve Davis Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:55:22 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/philo-agora-2007-sydneys-philosophy-in-the-cafe/#comment-16 Hazel, Thank you for a well researched and well presented piece on an important subject. It was great to see you give examples from a diversity of cultures to provide balance, because altruism has in the West at least, been deliberately devalued for political and ideological reasons. It’s been presented as based on selfishness; that selfishness in turn has been presented as the driver behind natural selection. Both of which are false, so it was pleasing to see that you rejected the position that true altruism is impossible. It’s easy to be taken in by the enthusiasm and writing style of selfish-gene theorists like Richard Dawkins, it’s only when you condense their theories to a concise summary that the nonsense becomes obvious. So I was surprised to see in the quote from Peter Singer that such an energetic thinker seems to have accepted that selfishness is innate and plays a major role in evolution. We’ll just have to work on him! Steve Davis Hazel,
Thank you for a well researched and well presented piece on an important subject. It was great to see you give examples from a diversity of cultures to provide balance, because altruism has in the West at least, been deliberately devalued for political and ideological reasons. It’s been presented as based on selfishness; that selfishness in turn has been presented as the driver behind natural selection. Both of which are false, so it was pleasing to see that you rejected the position that true altruism is impossible. It’s easy to be taken in by the enthusiasm and writing style of selfish-gene theorists like Richard Dawkins, it’s only when you condense their theories to a concise summary that the nonsense becomes obvious. So I was surprised to see in the quote from Peter Singer that such an energetic thinker seems to have accepted that selfishness is innate and plays a major role in evolution. We’ll just have to work on him!
Steve Davis

]]> Comment on Philo Agora 2008 by Marianne McMillan http://philoagora.wordpress.com#comment-8 Marianne McMillan Tue, 27 Feb 2007 02:56:03 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/philo-agora-2007-sydneys-philosophy-in-the-cafe/#comment-8 Wonderful talk Derek, very insightful and well structured on this Very complex subject, so that I would like to read it again. Do you intend to put it on the site? I would be grateful for your elucidations on the differences between brain and mind and what it all means in our lives. Thanks, Marianne Wonderful talk Derek, very insightful and well structured on this Very complex subject, so that I would like to read it again. Do you intend to put it on the site? I would be grateful for your elucidations on the differences between brain and mind and what it all means in our lives. Thanks, Marianne

]]> Comment on Immortality – Derek Maitland by Stephen Grenier Stini http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/01/04/immortality-derek-maitland/#comment-3 Stephen Grenier Stini Wed, 14 Feb 2007 06:52:31 +0000 http://philoagora.wordpress.com/2007/01/04/immortality-derek-maitland/#comment-3 Dear Derek, The world is small ! I have fiàound your name in the web by chance, I ask for you to philo-café, I re-found you in a speech about... well, about Immortality. Very high fitness. Very interesting your debate from Socrat to C. G. Jung, George Johnson – and you. I thing it is the debate itself which is the most immortal... How are you ? Fine your health ? Hoping to read you soon, best, Stephen (Grenier Stini) (The deaf artist) 14 sirius 7 Dear Derek,

The world is small ! I have fiàound your name in the web by chance, I ask for you to philo-café, I re-found you in a speech about… well, about Immortality. Very high fitness.

Very interesting your debate from Socrat to C. G. Jung, George Johnson – and you.
I thing it is the debate itself which is the most immortal…

How are you ? Fine your health ?

Hoping to read you soon, best,

Stephen
(Grenier Stini) (The deaf artist)

14 sirius 7

]]>