Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I presume your experience is limited to the parochial world of American Evangelical Christianity, or perhaps anecdotal, informed by your experience with intellectually unsophisticated people. Dawkins and his ilk used to love to pick on these poor people, because it’s so easy, even for a philosophical and theological rube like Dawkins.

But you are certainly not describing the intellectual muscle and heft of the Catholic tradition. You don’t stand a chance.

Materialists, by contrast, either never realize the incoherence of their naive position, or double down, consigning themselves to ever greater absurdities (yes, I am looking at you, eliminativism).



There is no dissonance in Catholic faith / philosophy? No hoop jumping to explain why Biblical claims don't match the lived experience of most people?


No.


Of course, the burden of proof is on the person claiming there is dissonance. He must a) define what he means by dissonance, and b) show that this tradition is characterized by it.

We didn't get that.

Instead, we got a downvote. So much more intellectual maturity and integrity.


I'm genuinely curious. What would that be?

Judging by their creeds it's believing that Easter really happened, and that the highest being is a composition that must be explained in hard to understand greek ontological terms.


Honestly, it would be weird if a supream being DIDN'T have to be explained in difficult to understand, abstract terms. Heck, look at medicine, human's are explained using difficult to understand Greek terms.


That is true.

The point I wanted to make however was rather that ontology moved on. The creed stayed the same.

Medicine is still complex, but moved on a bit since the good old days of the four humors.


I think someone like Zizek could debate a Catholic.


Get off your high horse. The muscle and heft of the Catholic tradition? LOL




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: