tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post1004258375911242774..comments2024-03-19T04:19:18.871-05:00Comments on Atheism Analyzed: Atheist Deconversion EvangelismUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-2377467788605355582012-05-23T10:47:19.949-05:002012-05-23T10:47:19.949-05:00Yonose,
It would seem that there are many people ...Yonose,<br /><br />It would seem that there are many people out there who believe that the problem of material monism can be "solved" with the adoption of various forms of "spiritual" monisms. I presume that this radical opposition to transcendence(and consequently to theism) emanates from a fundamental committment to the <i>unity</i> of Reality. <br /><br />From this perspective, the "dualism" of creator/creation is the "flaw" of theism. But monism, whether material or idealist, doesn't escape this dreaded dualism either.<br /><br />I'm inclined to think that a panentheistic position of "non-duality" is best suited to reconcile the poles of absolute/infinite; Divine/temporal immanence/ transcendence; freedom/fate; etc; etc...Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04865413665629644313noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-36785753638698838282012-05-22T20:50:57.242-05:002012-05-22T20:50:57.242-05:00Chris,
By the classical definitions of materialis...Chris,<br /><br />By the classical definitions of materialism and supernatualism, both are obviously mutually exclusive. <br /><br />The rejection of philosophical materialism, accompanied of the rejection of supernatualism, most of the time, leads to a specific strand of deism, or something similar, like naturalistic pantheism (which does is not meant to be classified as any strand of theism per se).<br /><br />Kind Regards.yonosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00853519252063461784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-59971510724393351632012-05-22T09:33:50.938-05:002012-05-22T09:33:50.938-05:00I just came across an interesting site: Metaphysic...I just came across an interesting site: Metaphysical Speculations at <br /><i>bernardokastrup.com</i>.<br /><br />One his latest books is entitled "Rationalist Spirituality". He seems to be highly critical of materialism and yet, as a scientist, he rejects supernaturalism. hmm. I'm going to have to read on.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04865413665629644313noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-25910700518818108632012-05-22T03:42:14.534-05:002012-05-22T03:42:14.534-05:00Hey Stan,
I was so mother-flipping gratified by y...Hey Stan,<br /><br />I was so mother-flipping gratified by your response, that I respondde in kind: http://martinspribble.com/archives/2510<br /><br />I hope you enjoy it.<br /><br />Warm regards,<br /><br />Jake Farr-WhartonJake Farr-Whartonhttp://www.imaginaryfriendsshow.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-5847808702700524312012-05-21T21:41:51.971-05:002012-05-21T21:41:51.971-05:00I;m pretty sure I already said that nice is nice.....I;m pretty sure I already said that nice is nice... yes here it is:<br /><br /><i>"That would be good, the nicely part; it’s so rare in Atheist land as this article admits."</i><br /><br />As for your eggheads vs holymen comment, I'm not sure what you mean by that. I don't subscribe to any Appeal to Authority; I subscribe to the personal journey of learning the processes of disciplined logic, the underlying axioms, and their use in determining rational probability of propositions such as are implicit in Atheism. I do understand why Atheists don't want any part of that. But it doesn't seem to fall out at the junction of eggheads & holymen.<br /><br />So maybe you could elaborate on your comment?Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14860850768269357636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-51422040551060901362012-05-21T20:41:29.483-05:002012-05-21T20:41:29.483-05:00JFW's post urges those who agree with him to b...JFW's post urges those who agree with him to behave well when trying to persuade. Do you not agree that's nice? an effective tactic?<br /><br />It sounds like your main objection is to persuasive efforts (evangelism) by those factually mistaken about the divine. ie, those whose rhetoric is leaky (not logical) and procedes from premises the result of misplaced trust (blind faith). In that objection, I'm sure most who trust eggheads over holymen are in furious agreement with you.@bnoreply@blogger.com