What do you think is the worst philosophical viewpoint?

[DonMartin]

"It is entirely right, rational and reasonable to believe in God without any evidence or argument at all"
- Plantinga

Regardless of my beliefs about God's existence, I just can't see the sense in this argument, especially when Plantinga eventually had to argue his point anyway : S.

The explanation I was given by an old teacher when I asked the same question was this:

"A fact is data based on an actual, physical object or action that can be measured and observed. A belief is something not based on actual empirical evidence. At least, those are my personal definitions, and to be fair, ask me tomorrow and they will have changed. Now, what I always assumed Plantinga meant by that was that it is only natural for you to believe in God, since you can not prove his existence with empirical data. One who finds a reason to believe in God has to do it without any fact: He must believe. Now, of course, that's just what I think. And I'm a maths teacher."

I havent actually read anything in depth about Plantinga since then, so to be fair, Im not sure what he meant. And I actually study philosophy. But according to that old teacher of mine, it would be like the old "God must not be proved, because with proof, there is no need for faith, and without faith, God is nothing" chestnut.

I still think that is an interesting idea, even if it isnt all that accurate, dont you?

 

[Krantos]

accusing atheists and theists of "blind belief."

This confused me, until I read some earlier posts and realized you'd been having an argument with someone else at the same time. They did make a "blind belief" comment. I did not.

I don't think you realized you were responding to two different people. That does, however, explain your hostility towards my posts.

 

[Racecar1994]

The explanation I was given by an old teacher when I asked the same question was this:

"A fact is data based on an actual, physical object or action that can be measured and observed. A belief is something not based on actual empirical evidence. At least, those are my personal definitions, and to be fair, ask me tomorrow and they will have changed. Now, what I always assumed Plantinga meant by that was that it is only natural for you to believe in God, since you can not prove his existence with empirical data. One who finds a reason to believe in God has to do it without any fact: He must believe. Now, of course, that's just what I think. And I'm a maths teacher."

I havent actually read anything in depth about Plantinga since then, so to be fair, Im not sure what he meant. And I actually study philosophy. But according to that old teacher of mine, it would be like the old "God must not be proved, because with proof, there is no need for faith, and without faith, God is nothing" chestnut.

I still think that is an interesting idea, even if it isnt all that accurate, dont you?

Hmm, I suppose my definition of faith seems to differ somewhat, but I can see the reasoning, although it still doesn't give the argument much credit in my opinion. I've always preferred the notions of Ludwig, Marx and D.S. Wilson (possibly AJ Ayer) that God is a psychological or social construct.

 

[GLo Jones]

Which ones think that there's no point? That one.

But why should we assume there is a point to anything? Unless you're religious, there really is no logical reason to.

Lol

You've managed to make a low content and potentially offensive post. Good job. The whole argument of 'you can't prove there isn't a god' which most atheists get so worked up about is actually the sole reason not to discard religion.

The fact is, we can't know that there isn't any form of god, so while I don't believe there is one, I have to acknowledge that my entire belief system about the world can easily be rendered invalid by the existence of some kind of deity.

To be quite honest, I'm actually very jealous of religious people. I can't imagine the feeling of security, safety and purpose felt by those whose logic you're currently mocking.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

Nihilism and solipcism, can't decide since the first one is childish and the second one is just silly.

 

[Kinokohatake]

After reading through this entire thread on philosophy and having no base knowledge of philosophy, I can answer with, philosophy. Seriously this shit sounds really stupid. What's the point of basing your entire belief system around someone else's belief system? Why not just be you and not analyze it and draw up some weird ass conclusions. Once again, I have no knowledge of philosophy outside of this thread.

 

[Del-Toro]

Well, I'd like to throw in my opinion as a Marxist-Leninist, as anyone will tell you, it's a great theory, as most communists can attest, people don't like to work together... Even in Marxist-Leninism, where there is a government making sure everyone is treated exactly equal and no one rises above another, people don't like to work together, they want to be better than everyone else.

Now take that government away, and see how long it takes for someone to decide, "working together is bullshit, I wanna be in power", who is going to stop them?

This is what I would consider the worst philosophical viewpoint: "Not everyone can be super rich and successful, therefore the government ought to make sure everyone stays both in line and mediocre at best!"

 

[DonMartin]

The explanation I was given by an old teacher when I asked the same question was this:

"A fact is data based on an actual, physical object or action that can be measured and observed. A belief is something not based on actual empirical evidence. At least, those are my personal definitions, and to be fair, ask me tomorrow and they will have changed. Now, what I always assumed Plantinga meant by that was that it is only natural for you to believe in God, since you can not prove his existence with empirical data. One who finds a reason to believe in God has to do it without any fact: He must believe. Now, of course, that's just what I think. And I'm a maths teacher."

I havent actually read anything in depth about Plantinga since then, so to be fair, Im not sure what he meant. And I actually study philosophy. But according to that old teacher of mine, it would be like the old "God must not be proved, because with proof, there is no need for faith, and without faith, God is nothing" chestnut.

I still think that is an interesting idea, even if it isnt all that accurate, dont you?

Hmm, I suppose my definition of faith seems to differ somewhat, but I can see the reasoning, although it still doesn't give the argument much credit in my opinion. I've always preferred the notions of Ludwig, Marx and D.S. Wilson (possibly AJ Ayer) that God is a psychological or social construct.

I think that's what Harry (the old teacher I quoted) meant, too. That you can't empirically prove a social or psychological construct, so to speak, so you have to believe in it. One does not exclude the other, I suppose.

Again, I might as well mention that I dont neccessarily share this opinion, I just thought I'd mention it. Im not arguing with you, I mean.

 

[InfiniteSingularity]

Which ones think that there's no point? That one.

But why should we assume there is a point to anything? Unless you're religious, there really is no logical reason to.

Lol

You've managed to make a low content and potentially offensive post. Good job. The whole argument of 'you can't prove there isn't a god' which most atheists get so worked up about is actually the sole reason not to discard religion.

The fact is, we can't know that there isn't any form of god, so while I don't believe there is one, I have to acknowledge that my entire belief system about the world can easily be rendered invalid by the existence of some kind of deity.

To be quite honest, I'm actually very jealous of religious people. I can't imagine the feeling of security, safety and purpose felt by those whose logic you're currently mocking.

Look, I don't care about religion. I see things for what they are and I don't look too far beyond that. It might be shallow but it makes life a lot simpler and easier to deal with. If I'm responsible for my own life then I don't hate it so much - it makes me feel empowered.

I found your wording amusing, because I don't think religion is 'logical' in the strictest sense of the word. I find a lot of organised religions and their ideas, ethics and beliefs quite irrational at best, and mind-blowingly stupid at worst. But hey, I don't care enough to get into a fight about it. That's just my personal look at it. You can believe in what you like, and I'm not gonna tell you otherwise. Whatever works for you. It doesn't for me.

And I don't care about being offensive. People offend each other all the time - it's just something you've gotta deal with. I'm merely being honest about what I think.

 

[Malaclemys]

Also agnosticism in practically all its forms.

So you think people shouldn't doubt things and instead should always pick a side, instead of thinking for themselves?

Look, I don't care about religion. I see things for what they are and I don't look too far beyond that. It might be shallow but it makes life a lot simpler and easier to deal with. If I'm responsible for my own life then I don't hate it so much - it makes me feel empowered.

I found your wording amusing, because I don't think religion is 'logical' in the strictest sense of the word. I find a lot of organised religions and their ideas, ethics and beliefs quite irrational at best, and mind-blowingly stupid at worst. But hey, I don't care enough to get into a fight about it. That's just my personal look at it. You can believe in what you like, and I'm not gonna tell you otherwise. Whatever works for you. It doesn't for me.

And I don't care about being offensive. People offend each other all the time - it's just something you've gotta deal with. I'm merely being honest about what I think.

God doesn't necessarily have to be an all-judging anthropomorphic grandpa in the sky.
Look up pantheism, or something similar.

People should have the benefit of the doubt, since science doesn't know everything.
I'm not saying "Believe in a god, or else". What I'm saying is - don't necessarily dismiss it blindly out of everything.

All we know of is our universe. What if our universe is like an atom in the bedroom of a "god", who just left his pizza to rot and it formed new life forms?
I'm not saying this is true, and again, I'm not saying "believe".
What I'm actually saying is - Don't believe!