Pro-life conservatives VS a Simple hypothetical
I've taught it various ways.
I've taught it historically (i.e. from Plato to Satre).
I've also taught it topically (i.e. epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, etc.)
When I got my degree, I was initially thinking of becoming a broke philosophy professor. Having kids ended up changing that goal, along w/ the politics of actually teaching what I wanted to teach, which was an uphill battle for colleagues of mine. I opted out of the fight. :(
I get it.
I was never more than adjunct faculty, so never taught more than two classes per semester. As adjunct, I didn't even had to keep office hours.
Are you familiar with TAG (Transcendental Argument for God)?
Championed by Cornelius Van Til and Greg Bahnsen.
More recently, by astrophysicist and Christian apologist Jason Lisle in his book The Ultimate Proof of Creation.
@coordi
I am... it's an old argument really... like really fkn old. Thousands of years old.
Are you familiar w/ Plato's understanding of The Good/The One, and the One and the Many problem?
Actually, I should start by asking, do you understand that the whole theological proof for Christian monotheism comes mostly from Aquinas, and Thomas was essentially a Platonist, and used Plato's (and Proclus') proofs, to show how both God is a one, and God is good?
That's a bummer.... sounds like you didn't have a very good instructor. If it's taught too dry, it can get a little thick for some people. You need to combine it w/ discussion and current events.
You obviously weren’t a Dominican high school teacher with a picture of Aquinas staring at your class.
That was our intro (2 years) textbook, which was part of a scholastic curriculum something like:
Freshman / Sophomore: logic, critical thinking
Junior: application of that reasoning to ethics, philosophy, and political thought
Senior: extension into theology, metaphysics, and social issues
I've shared that book with a few people in AI. The medieval logicians had some pretty elaborate schemas to maintain logic flow through all the ambiguities with natural language and it touches on supposition and all that. It's like a process of translating human language and inference into symbolic and material logic.
Actually, I should start by asking, do you understand that the whole theological proof for Christian monotheism comes mostly from Aquinas, and Thomas was essentially a Platonist, and used Plato's (and Proclus') proofs, to show how both God is a one, and God is good?
Plotinus was a mystic. Aquinas seems to have become one late in life too. Stories say that after a vision he told his secretary, ‘All I have written seems like straw to me,’ and never finished the Summa. I still remember reading something on Plotinus when I got that esse isn’t a concept or ‘a’ anything.
You obviously weren’t a Dominican high school teacher with a picture of Aquinas staring at your class.
That was our intro (2 years) textbook, which was part of a scholastic curriculum something like: Freshman / Sophomore: logic, critical thinkingJunior: application of that reasoning to ethics, philosopGreat... so did your teachers explain where he got his proofs? 😀
I'm going to guess not... but it was Proclus (not Plotinus, although he's great as well), and Plato's Timaeus. Thomas literally quotes Plato's work, if memory serves, around 1200 times.
Great... so did your teachers explain where he got his proofs? 😀
I'm going to guess not... but it was Proclus (not Plotinus, although he's great as well), and Plato's Timaeus. Thomas literally quotes Plato's work, if memory serves, around 1200 times.
Maybe, idk. Augustine and Dionysius for sure. Socrates teacher? That's old, old stuff back into the mystery schools.
Rationality can also be grounded in coherence: logic and math are abstract frameworks, but they don’t require a deity, only consistent axioms.
You don't even need consistent axioms. All the proofs about integers like "there is no greatest prime number" or the Chinese Remainder Theorem that were written down before math was really axiomatized still work. And even today we don't have a set of consistent axioms that can be shown in a convincing manner.
I am... it's an old argument really... like really fkn old. Thousands of years old.
Are you familiar w/ Plato's understanding of The Good/The One, and the One and the Many problem?
Yes. The "Problem of the One and the Many" is arguably the fundamental problem in philosophy.
The Ancient and Medieval philosophers understood (correctly, in my opinion) that philosophy must begin with Metaphysics.
I taught from 1982 until 1990. The kids then didn't have no ethernets.
Since in my last year or so of teaching I was having serious mental problems which ultimately led to me being on psych meds for 25+ years, I suspect my ratings would have been very poor.
Im excited for wan to be back soon to discuss killing babies so here’s our friendly reminder that the leading cause of death among pregnant women is homicide by male partners 😀
Im excited for wan to be back soon to discuss killing babies so here’s our friendly reminder that the leading cause of death among pregnant women is homicide by male partners 😀
A very sad statistic indeed. (Assuming it's true ofc.)
Would be interesting to know what percentage of these "male partners" were married to the pregnant women they murdered.
addendum: https://www.smfm.org/news/new-national-...
Apparently the leading cause of death of pregnant women (article uses the ridiculous phrase "birthing people") is homicide and suicide (11%). The article didn't seem to explicit say or imply that the majority of the murderers were 'male partners' of the pregnant women.
