From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Thu Jul 14 2005 - 16:26:02 BST
Reinier --
> In my opinion "God" should be seen here as a social value-pattern.
> It gets confusing this way. The repressing religious institutes
> were social patterns. The scientific community rejects these
> social patterns but also introduced "God" as an intellectual pattern,
> of which they say 'it does not exist' or 'it can not be proven'.
I think this use of "God" is intended as a nominal reference. Why not make
"religion" the social pattern that is "mediated" [if that's the proper MoQ
term] by the individual's particular conception of God?
> So in discussing this topic you have to make sure you're not
> discussing any of these value patterns. The big question that
> remains is therefore: 'What's the attitude of members of the
> MOQ-discussion group towards the beginning, source and/or
> end of experience/existence?
>
> One could then address things like purpose, evolution, etc. from that
perspective.
A fair question, Reinier -- one that gets to the heart of philosophy. I'll
be interested in seeing how the MD anti-theists (a-theists?) respond to it.
Essentially yours,
Ham
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 14 2005 - 16:31:14 BST