Philosophy (eye-roll)

I don’t expect analytic philosophy of religion to be able to settle much about a God, any more than I’d expect an analytic philosophy of botany to be able to tell me how to obtain a banana.

Whenever you think you might have a nice armchair argument for atheism, the cure is simple. Summon a few theistic philosophers and they’ll pick it apart. And vice versa.

You’d think that since it’s long been clear that all philosophy of religion is capable of doing is to cancel itself out, we’d have moved on to better things. But no, that’s not how the human species does things. We’ll bake the planet because we can’t conceive of anything other than business as usual. We’ll save the economy by pouring trillions into a parasitical financial sector. We’ll . . .

Oh, I give up. It’s galling that a species so incapable of consciously changing its ways considers itself rational. At least wasting time on the God of the Philosophers is fairly harmless.

"I'll take the last point first, by providing an example. The words "quadrilateral" and "quadrangle" ..."

Feser’s Case for God – Part ..."
"You are assuming that causation is at base a relation of events. This is an ..."

Feser’s Case for God – Part ..."
"Yeah, that seems plausible."

Feser’s Case for God – Part ..."
"You were right. That was a very interesting article. Thanks for sharing!"

Feser’s Case for God – Part ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment