Stop trying to point out contradictions in religion!

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just stop.

This is a Science, Math, and Philosophy forum. Religion has no literal relation to any of the three.

And also, pointing out that the Earth seems to be much older than the Bible says, or pointing out that it makes no sense to pray to a perfect God is not going to convince any theists to abandon their metaphysical beliefs.

That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

religion posts are one of the main reason this forum was created. you are correct to say that religion does not directly relate to the topic heads, but are you really going to be that picky?

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, i took a university course called, Philosophy of Religion.

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just stop.

This is a Science, Math, and Philosophy forum. Religion has no literal relation to any of the three.

And also, pointing out that the Earth seems to be much older than the Bible says, or pointing out that it makes no sense to pray to a perfect God is not going to convince any theists to abandon their metaphysical beliefs.

That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

religion posts are one of the main reason this forum was created. you are correct to say that religion does not directly relate to the topic heads, but are you really going to be that picky?

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, i took a university course called, Philosophy of Religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Impossible! Analytical philosophers wouldn't have such a thing. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Cerril]

Analytical philosophy? Okaaay.

Anyway, if you don't like it just leave, no point in participating in or condemning a discussion that didn't involve you in the first place.

Though if an argument was ever solved by pointing out the contradictions in religion, I'd be very, very surprised; so I'm in agreement that there isn't much value in these threads -- I tend to ignore them.

[kpux]

FWIW, many schools offer a BA in Theology. I think what is/isn't an "academic field" is open to debate. If you mean that Theology isn't a field of study where analytic reason and logic come into play, then I think I agree with you.

I should post here more often.

[drudman]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, many schools offer a BA in Theology. I think what is/isn't an "academic field" is open to debate. If you mean that Theology isn't a field of study where analytic reason and logic come into play, then I think I agree with you.

EDIT: Please note that I'm not using the word "nonsense" as it is used casually to be dismissive of something one does not like. I mean it as literally as possible.

I should post here more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying that it is straight up and down is not academic. The coursework for that major concerns nil that is literally meaningful, outside of actual historical study. You study nonsense, and the history of that nonsense for 4 years, and get a diploma.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
You're an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]


Well no not really. However, like most of us, I say idiotic things from time to time. That being said, the statement about "real philosophy" smacked of condescension to me. I could very well be wrong. I'm certainly willing to read about why this perceived to be true. If the condescension was only in my own mind, than I offer my apolgies.

I would also say that my point still holds about their being topics in philosophy (both real philosophy and unreal philosophy) that can be debated or discussed and never change anyone's mind.

Hopefully somone will be able to explain to me why analytical philosophy is the only real philosophy.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]

Hopefully somone will be able to explain to me why analytical philosophy is the only real philosophy.

[/ QUOTE ]

The subjects of analytical philosophy and what some people call continental philosophy are completely different and appeal to very different people. Statements such as "analytical philosophy is the only real philosophy" are obviously hyperbole whose meaning is clear and shouldn't be taken as seriously as you seem to.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
The subjects of analytical philosophy and what some people call continental philosophy are completely different and appeal to very different people. Statements such as "analytical philosophy is the only real philosophy" are obviously hyperbole whose meaning is clear and shouldn't be taken as seriously as you seem to

[/ QUOTE ]

You are right, I probably shouldve picked up on this, not quite sure why I didnt. Maybe I really am an idiot. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] At any rate, thanks for providing clarity. At some point if you feel so inclined, Id like to hear the differences between these two "schools" of philosophy. My sincerest apologies for the misunderstanding.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The subjects of analytical philosophy and what some people call continental philosophy are completely different and appeal to very different people. Statements such as "analytical philosophy is the only real philosophy" are obviously hyperbole whose meaning is clear and shouldn't be taken as seriously as you seem to

[/ QUOTE ]

You are right, I probably shouldve picked up on this, not quite sure why I didnt. Maybe I really am an idiot. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] At any rate, thanks for providing clarity. At some point if you feel so inclined, Id like to hear the differences between these two "schools" of philosophy. My sincerest apologies for the misunderstanding.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should also apologize for calling you an idiot; you're clearly not since you're approaching the conversation with a level head and an open mind. I am just tired of overreactions to things on this board though and didn't appreciate being called a snob when my statement was in no way spoken with snobbery nor intended to be.

As far as the differences, analytical philosophy tries very hard to be rational by laying out clearing arguments from a set of assumptions whereas continental philosophy tends to not approach its argument in this way. The former tries to be rigourous, the latter almost seems to assume that rigour is impossible as they tend to suppose that thought can't be abstracted away from the natural world.

[vulturesrow]

No apology necessary on your part, as I did overreact and I shouldve been called on it. That said, it is appreciated.


Anyhow, after your explanation I googled "continental philosophy vs. analytical philosophy" and turned up this interesting explanation. Do you agree with the writer's explanation? It certainly helped me understand yours better. At any rate, I learned something new, which is usually a good thing. I have always been interested in Philosoohy but have never really delved into it. I do see now why one might say religion isnt really a part of analytic philosophy, thought I will have to give that one some more thought.