- Jun 28, 2015
- 9,863
- 2,669
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
How do we develop the tools for not being taken in by poor philosphy? Also, dangerious Theology?
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How do we develop the tools for not being taken in by poor philosphy? Also, dangerious Theology?
Just to be up front, I am philosophical Thomist following Jacques Maritain. Sort of an Aristotelian but more tuned up in the 1200's and the 1900's. Is Thomism perfect? Nope. Pretty good though.How do we develop the tools for not being taken in by poor philosphy? Also, dangerious Theology?
Just to be up front, I am philosophical Thomist following Jacques Maritain. Sort of an Aristotelian but more tuned up in the 1200's and the 1900's. Is Thomism perfect? Nope. Pretty good though.
I came to this position after a few years of study of philosophers and the history of philosophy with multiple professors, looking at the Pre-Socratics, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics (whom I liked), the Epicurians, Descartes, Kant, Wittgenstein, Buber, and a whole lot of others. One thing that helped me keep my sanity going through it all was Copleston's honking big 'History of Philosophy' . Later Will Durant's honking big 'The Story of Philosophy'. I think Copleston helped me most because he also came from a deliberate point of Thomism and evaluated the different philosophies based on that. It was a pretty commonly available history of philosophy in the 1970's and I could get it volume by volume in paperback. The Durant was from the estate of my father in law.
I suppose I could have just concluded that all philosophy is futile following Luther. I could have concluded with one professor that all philosophy is is social expression (Levi) or that it's all just a footnote to Plato, or I could have gone full Nietzschean (except that I didn't have his particular diseases). I kind of liked Nietzsche's madness though.
The one thing I would avoid is the error of Luther who disdained philosophy, particularly the Scholastics. Luther couldn't quite see that he was himself enveloped in Nominalism, which was a late corruption of Scholasticism. When you say loudly enough that you have no philosophy you really have something but you can't even be critical of what you deny having. It's kind of the same with tradition. Those who say they have no tradition can't be critical of their actual tradition.
Platonism did OK for Christianity for a thousand years and is still fair. Aristotelianism has done OK for 750 years and it is still good following Maritain and the other modern Thomists including even Norman Geisler, the protestant Thomist. Use either of these to evaluate all of the others. And pray real hard that you don't get hoodwinked in the process. Actually that last bit might be the most important advice of all.
Now if you think Thomism is too Catholic for you, check out an article I don't fully agree with of course, but it is interesting: Does Thomism Lead to Catholicism? – NORMAN GEISLER
How do we develop the tools for not being taken in by poor philosphy? Also, dangerious Theology?
Sorry. No.Thomas? the didymas, doubter?
Theology must be done on one's knees to be any good. So too most things in life, including philosophy.Familiarity with Scripture and the history of its interpretation. Constant prayer, not only as speaking to God but giving space for God to speak to you. Philosophy and theology that strays too far from Scripture and tradition is bound to be wrong-headed in some way. General critical thinking skills and careful reading, learning about common fallacies especially common language fallacies. Ultimately, it's about trusting God to do the leading rather than trying to build a tower to reach Him.
How do we develop the tools for not being taken in by poor philosphy? Also, dangerious Theology?
Isn't that the truth!For instance, a philosophy might be presented as purely logical when in fact it relies heavily on emotion and the endorsement of an authority figure.
Library here I comeHello again @Daniel Marsh, I don't think that this will be exactly what you are after, but it is a very interesting book on the history of philosophy, a number of our principal philosophers and what they taught, and how what they taught continues to shape our thinking today, even as believers, both for the good and bad.
It's by theologian and pastor, R. C. Sproul, MDiv, PhD.
His book is called The Consequences of Ideas. ($9 on Kindle/$17 paperback)
God bless you!!
--David
p.s. - he has a 35-message video/audio teaching series by the same name, just FYI. The first message can be listened to for free online, but if you want to watch/hear more, I believe the entire 35-part series can be downloaded and/or listened to online for $31 right now.
You'll find it here:
.
Brother, do you have some good ideas on how to apply that to mormonism? Jehovah's witnesses? Christian Science is eassy to deal with. Just keep asking questions, they will contradict themselves so much, you will think the earth just started spinning backwords.Being familiar with rhetoric can help. To better understand the persuasive aspects of philosophical arguments.
![]()
For instance, a philosophy might be presented as purely logical when in fact it relies heavily on emotion and the endorsement of an authority figure. Likewise, a logically sound argument may not be the most persuasive. Perhaps it's just not presented in an optimal manner (which would include appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos). Either way, being able to dismantle and reframe a philosophy's persuasive aspects way will give you a better idea of what you're dealing with. While it may not necessarily reveal whether a philosophical claim is true, it's a useful tool that can help you avoid being taken in by poor philosophies.
It also helps to ask God for discernment and wisdom. There are many worldly philosophies, often changing and contradictory, competing for our attention and our time. Appealing directly to the source of truth can help keep our metaphorical feet on solid ground.
The best way is to develop your communication with the Holy Spirit, which God gives to his children through baptism.How do we develop the tools for not being taken in by poor philosphy? Also, dangerious Theology?