Philosophy class

Who gave you this impression?

They do not deny reason. But they are correct that there is no totally unbiased system that discovers totally objective criteria. But note the adjective "totally": that you can't have total objectivity seems to me pretty axiomatic. That doesn't mean you can't have reasonable certainty.

Refs. please. Of course, any neuroscientist will tell you that sight is at least partially constructed in the brain, that what we see is at least partially what the brain thinks is there.

Granted. But your church's interpretation of that truth, or my church's, or anyone else's interpretation of that truth is not, and never can be, totally without bias. Which is why not one single denomination in Christendom has ever got it 100% right. Because we're human beings, and we screw up. We mistake our own prejudices for the Holy Spirit 9 times out of 10.

Most of your views seem to come from post-Enlightenment rationalistic thinking.

artybloke,

Let's start again. This was my first post.

"As far as I can tell, and correct me if I have the wrong impression, postmodernists are blithering educated idiots and they would consider this reference to them a compliment. They are simply the cleverest to date of those who "lie and deny" everything. They say it is impossible for anyone to achieve certainties. They say reason does not work; that there is no unbiased system for discovering objective criteria. And you cannot trust your eyes and ears and conscience to perceive reality. They are not philosophers or thinkers, they are riddlers, smug in their challenge to society to discover their fallacies and linguistic tricks. A riddler says, Do we exist? A philosopher says, How have we achieved the certainty we exist?

Greg,
I think most academic philosophy is just out-of-date gibberish. I would advise that you become familar with the 20-some main fallacies and look for these fallacies in the stuff you study. Try to understand exactly how you have achieved your certainties about God so you have a solid point of reference when examining other stuff. I hope this helps a little."

It is simply my opinion that many philosophers in university circles are hypocrites.

Your statement that we cannot be certain of anything is gibberish because if it is true, you cannot be certain of that very statement!

To say reason cannot discover objective criteria is also gibberish. I and most everyone have achieved the certainty that the objective criteria for building as internal combustion engine has been discovered by reason. The frailities and biases of the human mind can be overridden by using reason. For example, if someone is repairing an engine, it does not matter if he is angry or happy or sleepy as long as his actions are ordered by reason.

Subjectivity just does not work in the real world. If one person says murdering innocents is OK and another says it is wrong, then without any objectivity there is no solution to the dispute.

Furthermore, If we cannot be certain of anything then the entire message of Jesus is negated. We then could not know Jesus or the joy of salvation. I have achieved certainty that I can know Jesus in spite of any frailities or biases I have.

I have gone toe to toe with 10 or 12 postmodernists and when I accuse them of being blithering educated idiots, they protest. But when I point out that in order to protest this accusation they must be Realists, they withdraw their protest!

I suggest most so-called philosophers are hypocrites because they are intentionally trying to muddy the waters. I suggest that they deny reason because reason produces Truth (Jesus), and they do not want to submit to the Truth.

artybloke,

I would like to add that the contention that "reason is limited" is gibberish, in my opinion. I define reason as the adding of facts to your minds picture of what exists. (And a fact is a certainty achieved through generalizations of previous experiences.) Reason is not only unlimited but has NEVER failed. What postmodernists do to muddy the waters is to confuse reason with the mind's ability to discover facts, which is limited.

Discovering facts and adding facts to your mind's picture are two completely different things. But the postmodernists I have met just can't seem to figure that out on their own. Postmodernists cleverly disguise their hatred for the Truth by trying to undermine reason, which produces Truth. Their efforts have halted any major moral advance by civilization. That's why I say they are the wickedest of the secular hypocrites.

Jesus is the king of philosophy. His philosophy is far more advanced than anything written today. For example, His parables are perfect in simply and quickly explaining the deepest of concepts. If He is the Truth, as He says He is, then He is discovered and understood using the process of reason. Also, on the last day, how will He convince the ungodly that they are ungodly? I think He will use reason.

Even salvation is ordered by reason. In Isa. 1:18, God says, Come now, let us reason together. Though your sins be as scarlet they shall be white as snow. God is not going to accept any rationalizations or any gibberish.

This is Christian Realism, fyi.

And what's your mind's picture made up of? Some facts certainly, but also an awful lot of cultural baggage, a priori assertions about reality and a view of reality that has been drilled into you since you first took breath. Everyone wears cultural rose-tinted spectacles, especially those who refuse to acknowledge that they do so.

The problem is to define what you mean by reason. What I'm saying is that you can't have absolute certainty, not that you can't have reason. At least not in human terms. Most post-modernists that I've read are attempting to expose the internal biases of the Western humanist tradition in order to find a more reasonable, actually more rational, way of looking at the world.

Which ones are they?

artybloke,

Sad to say, but you are just grasping at straws now. I agree with the one point that no one is completely reasonable but, again, reason has NEVER failed. I don't believe postmodernists are sincere since they omit defining reason. That is a clever trick to muddy the waters.

I suggest that EVERY postmodernist refuses to acknowledge that it is the mind that is limited in discovering facts, while reason is not limited in any way.

And, if you have never achieved any absolute certainties as you maintain, why don't you jump off a ten-story building and see what happens.

I think you are lying. I think you have achieved absolute certainty about what will happen even though you have never had even one previous first hand experience of this before!

I don't think you understand the philosophy, especially with the jump-off-a-building comment. Just because we're uncertain of things doesn't mean we can't make value judgments on decisions.

__________________

Again, I maintain that people have achieved certainties. For example, the earth is not flat and internal combustion engines exist.

And, I think your value judgment about jumping off a building contains an absolute certainty. You just refuse to admit it. You and everyone else is certain about what will happen!

How long can you continue to deny common sense??

Reason doesn't exist outside the mind. Reality exists outside the mind, though a lot of how we percieve that reality is a construction of the mind.

The round earth is a conspiracy of atheist scientists and cars are actually run by little demons who make it appear that there is a real solid engine.

The earth is a hologram. I think Neo's in trouble, I'm going in.

Well, it's a possibility... 99% certainty isn't absolute certainty. Ask any scientist if any scientific theory has actually been proved, they'll tell you, well, we're pretty certain about this this and this, but there's always the possibility that with new information, we may have to completely abandon our theories.

I've never yet read a post-modernist who denies that reality doesn't exist, by the way. They do, however, say that a lot of what we think of as certainties are not all that certain. Especially when it comes to ideas of history, critical theory and ideology, which is what most post-modernists are writing about.

artybloke,

You are still grasping at straws. Reason is not a product of the imagination. Reason is a process and does indeed exist outside the mind, just as love does or any other non-imaginary concept. Again, reason is NOT limited in any way and has NEVER failed.

Yes, false certainties exist. But they are based on repetitions of rationalizations.

Are you saying that people cannot use reason to achieve the certainty that God exists?

I think the whole purpose of postmodernism is to deny God since one of the greatest passions people have is the passion for self deception. Are there any Christian postmodernists? Any at all?

Yes. I have faith that God exists. Reason takes you so far, then faith has to take over. Reason makes belief in God plausible, not certain.

You're talking to one.