[...]
I teach both a college logic course and a college philosophy course, my freshmen and I have conversations along these lines quite often. You basically are asking me and everyone reading this to disregard the "rules" of knowledge, and also the basic tenets of philosophy. We start with the idea that there are certain things that can be said to be "known" and go from there. Hence, through gathering evidences and with these basic tenets in mind, I can say I know that Christ is Lord, and that God exists.
[...]
37 comments
Whenever someone disagrees with you on the net it seems like it's not because they happen to have read a book, or it's their hobby or whatever. They're always an expert!! They teach a course in XXX. They are the President's advisor for XXX. I don't think there can be that many experts on the planet.
Well, let's start with the "evidences." Show them.
You couldn't pass Philo 101 if the instructor spotted you two tests and a term paper.
Hey, are you sure you taught Philosophy?. Last time I went to such a course, my teacher, a priest nonetheless, said that philosophy is totally divorced from religion. Lying for Jesus?
mmmm interesting.
1) I start with a known, you are full of crap.
it works !
I majored in Earth Science, but I took PHIL 100 as one of my GenEd couses and I can spot the flaw in this a mile off (1.62 km outside the US). The first day, the prof told those of us who weren't Philosophy majors that the point of it wasn't to be able to quote Kant or Nietche, but critical thinking, which Kliska doesn't seem to do.
I was going to say she (my guess from the nick) wasn't a fundie, but only boasted about her skills in logic and argumenting... one thing that bothers me about logic and philosophy is that the Rules of Arguments seems more important than the subject and actual truth...
... but then I noticed were the quote was from...
I hope you teach at a Bible college, then, where you can be safely avoided by anyone with a functioning intellect. (Um, no offense to anyone who went to Bible college!)
Or else you're just lying. Anyone who uses the word "tenets" twice in one paragraph has to be trying to impress someone.
Protip: One of the basic tenets of philosophy isn't "well, we'll just say that God is true, so that we don't have to question it." Critical thinking is about examining all thoughts, including the ones you don't want to examine.
I've only taken Philosophy classes up to PHIL 102, but I'd imagine I know myself better than Kliska knows him/herself.
So, what "evidences" have you gathered, dearie?
What I remember from my philosophy studies (as a pupil; I'm the only non-expert on the Net), over 20 years ago, it centered around the discussion of ideas. Ideas don't have to be reality-based and you can discuss what-ifs to your heart's content.
Where's the fun in discussions, when you start by saying you KNOW that Christ is Lord, and that God exists? Remember those "open questions" you're supposed to use, dearie? How do you know? Where did you learn that? When did you question that knowledge? What kind of "evidences" do you have? (Damn, I've already asked that one, haven't I?)
"I teach both a college logic course and a college philosophy course..."
- Tell me, do your logic courses ever mention the fallacy of appeal to authority?
Logic demands evidence.
"the basic tenets of philosophy"
There is no truth demand to a philosophy, while many contain SOME logic and long realized ideas, many more are as wackadoo as astrology.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
