Religion Thread: I never metaphysics I didn't like

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Religion Thread: I never metaphysics I didn't like

«‹›266 »

Thirteen Orphans: Dec 2, 2012; I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you.

They did it for St. Th�r�se of Lisieux�s parents as well.

Thirteen Orphans fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Sep 7, 2023

# ? Sep 7, 2023 01:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 18:31

Ohtori Akio: Jul 15, 2022

The example that springs to my mind is the 28 Martyrs of Nagasaki. Maybe the primary figure is the one whose story gets told, but the group recognition as saints is definitely not unheard of.

# ? Sep 7, 2023 01:32

UwUnabomber: Sep 9, 2012; Pubes dreaded out so hoes call me Chris Barnes. I don't wear a condom at the pig farm.

Well the URL had me concerned.

# ? Sep 7, 2023 01:43

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

# ? Sep 7, 2023 02:08

Keromaru5: Dec 28, 2012; Pictured: The Wolf Of Gubbio (probably)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Saints being glorified/canonized as groups isn't all that unusual. The first millennium had the 7 sleepers of Ephesus and the 40 martyrs of Sebaste, and examples along the lines of "St. So and So and his/her companions." IIRC, the Vatican has also recently started commemorating the 21 Coptic martyrs.

# ? Sep 7, 2023 02:12

LITERALLY A BIRD: Sep 27, 2008; I knew you were trouble
when you flew in

I started another Paul Tillich book -- Biblical Religion and the Search for Ultimate Reality. It surprised me by starting off with reminders of both recent in-thread conversations and one I had held elsewhere. I really belatedly learned the word "ontological" a couple days ago, put a couple things together, and was lamenting to my boyfriend "so almost every time I have said to you 'metaphysical' I have meant 'ontological'?" I hate the word metaphysical, so that's great. But I also feel a bit like a fool. In any case today I started the new Tillich book I downloaded a sample of last night and right in the middle of section two of chapter one, "Basic Concepts," he synonymizes "ontological" and "metaphysical." So I would like to share this section on "biblical religion" (this is, religion of a dialectical nature, where believers offer "religion" to God and God offers "revelation" to believers; the "bible/biblical" in this case is the record of that exchange of Religion [or "Reception"] and Revelation within the pairing of the Divine-human relationship) -- on "biblical religion" and philosophy. A much better pairing than the science one.

Please and thank you.

The enormously long second paragraph was Tillich's choice, per my Kindle anyway. Sorry.

Biblical Religion and the Search for Ultimate Reality posted:

I. BASIC CONCEPTS
2. The Meaning of Philosophy

This character of biblical literature makes possible and necessary the confrontation of biblical religion with philosophy. But a confrontation would be impossible if philosophy were logical analysis and epistemological inquiry only, however important may be the development of these tools for philosophical thought. Yet philosophy, �love of wisdom,� means much more than this. It seems to me that the oldest definition given to philosophy is, at the same time, the newest and that which always was and always will be valid: Philosophy is that cognitive endeavor in which the question of being is asked. In accordance with this definition, Aristotle summarized the development of Greek philosophy, anticipating the consequent periods up to the Renaissance and preparing the modern ways of asking the same question. The question of being is not the question of any special being, its existence and nature, but it is the question of what it means to be. It is the simplest, most profound, and absolutely inexhaustible question�the question of what it means to say that something is.

This word �is� hides the riddle of all riddles, the mystery that there is anything at all. Every philosophy, whether it asks the question of being openly or not, moves around this mystery, has a partial answer to it, whether acknowledged or not, but is generally at a loss to answer it fully. Philosophy is always in what the Greeks called aporia (�without a way�), that is, in a state of perplexity about the nature of being. For this inquiry I like to use the word �ontology,� derived from logos (�the word�) and on (�being�); that is, the word of being, the word which grasps being, makes its nature manifest, drives it out of its hiddenness into the light of knowledge. Ontology is the center of all philosophy. It is, as Aristotle has called it, �first philosophy,� or, as it was unfortunately also called, �metaphysics,� that which follows the physical books in the collection of Aristotelian writings. This name was and is unfortunate, because it conveys the misconception that ontology deals with transempirical realities, with a world behind the world, existing only in speculative imagination. In all areas of theology�historical, practical, systematic�there are theologians who believe that they can avoid the confrontation of philosophy and biblical religion by identifying philosophy with what they call �metaphysical speculation,� which they can then throw onto the garbage heap of past errors, intellectual and moral. I want to challenge as strongly as possible all those who use this language to tell us what they mean by metaphysics and speculation and, after they have done so, to compare their description with what the classical philosophers from Anaximander to Whitehead have done. Speculari, the root of the word �speculation,� means �looking at something.� It has nothing to do with the creation of imaginary worlds, an accusation which the philosophers could make against the theologians with equal justification. It is infuriating to see how biblical theologians, when explaining the concepts of the Old or New Testament writers, use most of the terms created by the toil of philosophers and the ingenuity of the speculative mind and then dismiss, with cheap denunciations, the work from which their language has been immensely enriched. No theologian should be taken seriously as a theologian, even if he is a great Christian and a great scholar, if his work shows that he does not take philosophy seriously.

Therefore, to avoid the �black magic� of words like �metaphysical speculation,� let us speak of ontology as the basic work of those who aspire to wisdom (sophia in Greek, sapientia in Latin), meaning the knowledge of the principles. And, more specifically, let us speak of ontological analysis in order to show that one has to look at things as they are given if one wants to discover the principles, the structures, and the nature of being as it is embodied in everything that is.

On the basis of such an ontological analysis, philosophy tries to show the presence of being and its structures in the different realms of being, in nature and in man, in history and in value, in knowledge and in religion. But in each case it is not the subject matter as such with which philosophy deals but the constitutive principles of being, that which is always present if a thing participates in the power to be and to resist nonbeing.

Philosophy in this sense is not a matter of liking or disliking. It is a matter of man as man, for man is that being who asks the question of being. Therefore, every human being philosophizes, just as every human being moralizes and acts politically, artistically, scientifically, religiously. There are immense differences in degree, education, and creativity among different human beings in the exercise of these functions, but there is no difference in the character of the function itself. The child�s restless question, �Why is this so; why is that not so?� and Kant�s grandiose description, in his critique of the cosmological argument, of the God who asks himself, �Why am I?� are the same in substance although infinitely distinguished in form. Man is by nature a philosopher, because he inescapably asks the question of being. He does it in myth and epic, in drama and poetry, in the structure and the vocabulary of any language.

It is the special task of philosophy to make this question conscious and to elaborate the answers methodologically. The prephilosophical ways of putting and answering the question of being prepare the philosophical way. When philosophy comes into its own, it is not without a long prehistory. Without Homer�s poetry, the Dionysian festivals, and the Solonic laws, and, above all, without the genius of the Greek language, no Western philosophy as we have it now would have developed. And everyone who participates in the language and the art and the cult and the social life of a culture is a collaborator in the creation of its philosophy. He is a prephilosophical philosopher, and most people are in this situation even after a methodical philosophy has been born. But one thing has changed since this birth: not only does prephilosophy determine philosophy but also philosophy determines prephilosophy. The language in nonphilosophical literature and common usage, which is a form of prephilosophy too, is determined by previous philosophical usage. Nor do those who are antiphilosophical escape this. Even the despiser of philosophy is not only a collaborator with, but also a pupil of, the subject of his contempt. This interdependence between prephilosophy and philosophy is also true of the biblical and all other religious and theological literature, even if written under a strong, antiphilosophical bias. The fundamentalist minister who said to me, �Why do we need philosophy when we possess all truth through revelation?� did not realize that, in using the words �truth� and �revelation,� he was determined by a long history of philosophical thought which gave these words the meaning in which he used them. We cannot avoid philosophy, because the ways we take to avoid it are carved out and paved by philosophy.

edit to build on that section a little

Section 4.2: Biblical Personalism and the Word posted:

A person-to-person relationship is actual through the word. One is related to a person in speaking to him, and one remains in relation to him only if he answers. Under certain conditions, signs and gestures can be substituted for the spoken word. But they have meaning only in reference to words, to the spoken language. Biblical personalism is most conspicuously manifest in the significance of the word in biblical literature. The Word of God, the words of the prophets, the words of Jesus, and the words of the apostles and preachers appear on every page of the Bible. Theological biblicism usually takes the form of a �theology of the word.� It took this form in the Reformation, and it does so in the neo-Reformation theology of today. In the light of biblical personalism this is easy to understand. The word is directed to that in man which makes him a person, his rational, responsible, deciding center. The word mediates meaning which must be understood, judged, accepted, or rejected in a free interpretation and a free decision. All this is performed by man as a person. The word is addressed to the personal center. Revelation through the word respects man�s freedom and his personal self-relatedness. Man is asked to listen, but he is left free to decline. He is not supposed to be overpowered by the word, as in sorcery, where the word is used as a physical cause, or in magic, where the word is used as a psychic cause, or in suggestive talk, where the word is used as an emotional cause. These uses of the word are possible, but they eliminate the essence of the word, its quality as the bearer of meaning. They appear in the Bible as in the whole history of religion, but they are opposed, reduced in importance, and almost annihilated in the biblical religion. The word as the bearer of meaning has an impact on all sides of man�s spiritual life, on the whole personality. It is addressed to the intellect; it informs man about his situation, his actual and ideal relation to God, the world, and himself. It is addressed to the will, and this is foremost in the Old Testament and decisive in the New. The Word of God is, above all, the command of God, the expression of his will and purpose, the means of creating and ordering the universe, of legislating and directing nations and individuals, of ruling and fulfilling history as a whole. And the word is addressed to the heart of man in threat and promise, in wrath and love, in rejection and acceptance. The word speaks to the person as a whole, to the free, responsible, and deciding center of the person.

e2: lol, my God, no pun intended. I have finally reached the main thrust of this book's argument in the final paragraph of chapter five, section three, and it appears to be discovering synthesis between biblical religion, that is to say religion of the Word, and religion that is ontological, remember that is to say, metaphysical.

Section 5.3: Personalism, History, and Eschatology posted:

We have discussed biblical personalism in some of its main doctrinal expressions, but we have omitted one whole side of biblical religion: its understanding of man and his situation. This will be the first task of the next chapter. Yet, if we look at the results of this chapter, it seems that no further chapter is possible. The confrontations of biblical religion and its personalism with the impersonalism of ontology seem to rule out any attempt at a synthesis. It will be the task of a part of the following chapter and of the last to show that this is not so and that each side needs the other for its own realization. But this relation is by no means to be found on the surface. It is necessary to penetrate deeply into both the nature of biblical religion and the nature of ontology in order to discover their profound interdependence.

This is wonderfully exciting. I will shhh for a little now. :lol:

LITERALLY A BIRD fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Sep 7, 2023

# ? Sep 7, 2023 03:00

Lutha Mahtin: Oct 10, 2010; Your brokebrain sin is absolved...go and shitpost no more!

TOOT BOOT posted:

I always thought this was an individual process, perhaps it was up until now:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/06/world/ulma-family-beatify-nazis-intl-scli/index.html

a bunch of korean martyrs have moved along the canon process in groups. JP2 canonized 103 of them on a single day in 1984

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Martyrs

# ? Sep 9, 2023 05:10

Squizzle: Apr 24, 2008

if only one of the something awful dot com (sub)forums could be canonized as saints, what one would you suggest and why

# ? Sep 9, 2023 20:33

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

Squizzle posted:

if only one of the something awful dot com (sub)forums could be canonized as saints, what one would you suggest and why

Coupons.

Because these deals are miraculous!

# ? Sep 9, 2023 20:39

killer crane: Dec 30, 2006; THUNDERDOME LOSER 2019

BYOBeatification

# ? Sep 9, 2023 20:46

Ohtori Akio: Jul 15, 2022

Squizzle posted:

if only one of the something awful dot com (sub)forums could be canonized as saints, what one would you suggest and why

LF has a case for martyrdom

# ? Sep 9, 2023 21:21

Squizzle: Apr 24, 2008

this is the kobayashi maru test of saint-chooser academy

# ? Sep 9, 2023 23:25

Pellisworth: Jun 20, 2005

video games is the closest thing that goons have to a shared religion so im gonna go with that.

Ohtori Akio posted:

LF has a case for martyrdom

i was irl friends with mccaine for a short while and let me tell you, he was no saint

# ? Sep 10, 2023 01:35

Ohtori Akio: Jul 15, 2022

Pellisworth posted:

video games is the closest thing that goons have to a shared religion so im gonna go with that.

i was irl friends with mccaine for a short while and let me tell you, he was no saint

what's the catholic teaching on guys who live a life of delicious sin then go down righteous style

# ? Sep 10, 2023 01:43

UwUnabomber: Sep 9, 2012; Pubes dreaded out so hoes call me Chris Barnes. I don't wear a condom at the pig farm.

PHIZ, because it's actually dead.

# ? Sep 10, 2023 03:40

BattyKiara: Mar 17, 2009

This thread, for weIcoming everyone

# ? Sep 10, 2023 13:45

ArmedZombie: Jun 6, 2004; Can't post for 4 hours!

Squizzle posted:

if only one of the something awful dot com (sub)forums could be canonized as saints, what one would you suggest and why

pet island because francis of assisi

# ? Sep 11, 2023 18:26

Squizzle: Apr 24, 2008

ArmZ posted:

pet island because francis of assisi

by way of indirectly reminding me about st clare of assisi, you have brought to fore an undiscussed dimension of consideration: which forum name ends up sounding most euphonious when prefaced “saint”, accounting for both saint clare/saint john style readings and sinclair/sinjin style??

sinbyob in unwieldy, but sinfiz is charming. for instance

# ? Sep 11, 2023 22:10

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

St. Your Operating System is a Piece of poo poo just rolls off the tongue, imo.

# ? Sep 12, 2023 06:15

Keromaru5: Dec 28, 2012; Pictured: The Wolf Of Gubbio (probably)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Interesting way to bring back the old Puritan trend of hortatory names.

# ? Sep 12, 2023 12:03

Neon Noodle: Nov 11, 2016; there's nothing wrong here in montana

If-Lowtax-had-not-died-for-thee-thou-hadst-been-banned Barebone

# ? Sep 12, 2023 15:14

ArmedZombie: Jun 6, 2004; Can't post for 4 hours!

Squizzle posted:

by way of indirectly reminding me about st clare of assisi, you have brought to fore an undiscussed dimension of consideration: which forum name ends up sounding most euphonious when prefaced “saint”, accounting for both saint clare/saint john style readings and sinclair/sinjin style??

sinbyob in unwieldy, but sinfiz is charming. for instance

simp zone via syncope

# ? Sep 13, 2023 14:42

BattyKiara: Mar 17, 2009

Why is this thread suddenIy siIent? What happened?

# ? Sep 24, 2023 14:46

Gaius Marius: Oct 9, 2012

REM's back in vogue

# ? Sep 24, 2023 15:00

Valiantman: Jun 25, 2011; Ways to circumvent the Compact #6: Find a dreaming god and affect his dreams so that they become reality. Hey, it's not like it's you who's affecting the world. Blame the other guy for irresponsibly falling asleep.

Personally, I've not figured out anything interesting to discuss, not that I am a big conversionalist online to begin with. :shrug:

I do like to reply once in a while but mostly just lurk nowadays. I suspect a part of it is because quite a few topics have been talked about in various iterations of the thread.

# ? Sep 24, 2023 16:41

Neon Noodle: Nov 11, 2016; there's nothing wrong here in montana

BattyKiara posted:

Why is this thread suddenIy siIent? What happened?

Yom Kippur

# ? Sep 25, 2023 02:16

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

BattyKiara posted:

Why is this thread suddenIy siIent? What happened?

I got raptured, but the Lord put me back after I showed Jesus and some of the wheel-of-fire angels Plum Village on my phone.

# ? Sep 25, 2023 03:08

TOOT BOOT: May 25, 2010

I had plans the night of the rapture, so...

# ? Sep 25, 2023 08:44

Tias: May 25, 2008; Pictured: the patron saint of internet political arguments (probably)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Cults of Glorantha vol. 1 and 2 came out, so I'm knee-deep in earth goddess rituals to crib from

# ? Sep 25, 2023 10:13

Killingyouguy!: Sep 8, 2014

Saw this movie it was pretty cool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42tDHKICVOM

# ? Sep 25, 2023 12:23

Josef bugman: Nov 17, 2011; Pictured: Poster prepares to celebrate Holy Communion (probablY)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

I've been busy at work and trying to just read and not post.

# ? Sep 25, 2023 17:45

BIG FLUFFY DOG: Feb 16, 2011; On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

I was stuck in bardo but I�m back now

# ? Sep 27, 2023 03:30

Gaius Marius: Oct 9, 2012

BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:

I was stuck in bardo but I�m back now

How is Lincoln doing? Any regrets on the VP choice?

# ? Sep 27, 2023 03:41

Keromaru5: Dec 28, 2012; Pictured: The Wolf Of Gubbio (probably)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

I've been lurking, but mostly posting in threads elsewhere. I also started student teaching this semester, but that's hit a few unexpected snags.

I was, however, looking at the full moon last night and thinking about a homily my priest gave a few weeks ago, about Matthew 17:14-20, and thought the thread would find it interesting.

Matthew 17:14-20 posted:

14 And when they came to the crowd, a man came up to him and kneeling before him said, 15 �Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is an epileptic and he suffers terribly; for often he falls into the fire, and often into the water. 16 And I brought him to your disciples, and they could not heal him.� 17 And Jesus answered, �O faithless and perverse generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him here to me.� 18 And Jesus rebuked him, and the demon came out of him, and the boy was cured instantly. 19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, �Why could we not cast it out?� 20 He said to them, �Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, �Move from here to there,� and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.�

What my priest noted was that the term "epileptic" is actually a mistranslation. In the original Greek, the father says "σεληνιάζεται," which is closer in meaning to "moonstruck" or "lunatic"--"σελήνη" or "selini" means "moon." And that's why Jesus is giving that rebuke: the father is blaming the moon--a giant inanimate object, with no will of its own--for his son's condition, and blaming the Apostles for not curing him. So while in modern translations, it's mainly the Apostles' lack of faith that prevented the healing, it's primarily the father's, for accusing a neutral part of God's creation of causing evil.

St. Theophylact of Ohrid puts it this way:

quote:

The moon was not the cause, but rather, the demon would take note when the moon was full, and then would set upon his victim, so that men would blaspheme the created works of God as maleficent.

# ? Sep 30, 2023 21:51

Goatse James Bond: Mar 28, 2010; If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

Y'all: I just finished Mrs Davis and, my friends, this is an amazing show. It is also extremely relevant to our interests. I hesitate to describe it too far, but the immediate pitch, as far as I am concerned, is a couple bits from a low spoiler review that I now agree with in its entirety. all spoilers from first episode, most from very early in it

For much of my first viewing of the premiere episode, I was confused; during the opening moments, in which a gruesome fight sequence plays out inside a 14th-century Paris convent, I thought I had accidentally clicked on the wrong screener. By the eighth and final installment of season one, I was ready to race through the streets with a sparkler in each hand shouting, town-crier-style, �Watch Mrs. Davis, you magnificent cowards!!�

To the extent it�s possible to summarize this show, it is about a nun who embarks on a series of increasingly ridiculous quests under the direction of an AI dubbed the Algorithm, or Mrs. Davis.

It has deep thoughts about religion, and faith, and what it means to be faithful, and what happens to traditional religion in a world where Helios from Deus Ex is demonstrably real.

Review: https://www.vulture.com/article/mrs-davis-review-peacock.html

quote:

And when you eventually finish the finale � stick with this one, I beg you � you are welcome to join me so we can both run down the street, screaming as loud as we want about what a wild-rear end pleasure it�s been to engage with this beautifully demented TV program.

# ? Oct 1, 2023 23:15

Pellisworth: Jun 20, 2005

With fall here and winter coming shortly (for those of us in the nothern hemisphere anyway) I'm looking for stuff to read during the cold.

Any recommendations? Reading LAB's posts I think I should get into some Tillich or similar but idk where to start in particular.

# ? Oct 2, 2023 18:59

Keromaru5: Dec 28, 2012; Pictured: The Wolf Of Gubbio (probably)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Well, I just finished Christ the Conqueror of Hell by Hilarion Alfeyev, which surveys the Orthodox traditions around the descent of Jesus into Hades after his crucifixion.

# ? Oct 2, 2023 19:23

Gaius Marius: Oct 9, 2012

Pellisworth posted:

With fall here and winter coming shortly (for those of us in the nothern hemisphere anyway) I'm looking for stuff to read during the cold.

Any recommendations? Reading LAB's posts I think I should get into some Tillich or similar but idk where to start in particular.

Christian books? Religious books? Philosophy books? Or just book books?

# ? Oct 2, 2023 21:08

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

Pellisworth posted:

Any recommendations? Reading LAB's posts I think I should get into some Tillich or similar but idk where to start in particular.

Dynamics of Faith is a quick and easy start that will let you know if you want more.

A collection of his sermons (Shaking of the Foundations) is up on the internet.
http://media.sabda.org/alkitab-2/Religion-Online.org%20Books/Tillich,%20Paul%20-%20The%20Shaking%20of%20the%20Foundations.pdf

# ? Oct 2, 2023 21:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 18:31

Pellisworth: Jun 20, 2005

Gaius Marius posted:

Christian books? Religious books? Philosophy books? Or just book books?

yes

edit: not really being flippant here, I'm open to any recommendations. Just lookin for books

# ? Oct 2, 2023 21:27

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Religion Thread: I never metaphysics I didn't like

«‹›266 »