[C] [Wittrs] Re: Re: Wittgenstein on Religious Belief
- From: gprimero <gerardoprim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:59:09 -0500
(CJ) It would be nice if both Martin and our own devotees of Martin's
intellectual meanderings would take a look at "On Certainty" and review the
further, more considered treatment of the themes of the "Lectures on Religion"
before impugning Wittgensteins's arguments on the ad hominem basis of nothing
more than gossip about his private life quite irrelevant to the integrity of
his reasoning.
(Gerardo) Hello CJ. I was the person that first mentioned Martin's text, but
I'm certainly not "one of Martin's devotees". Unfortunately, the thread focused
mainly on Martin's deficiencies (an issue about which I'm not very interested),
while my initial questions focused mainly on how can we understand
Wittgenstein's Lectures (an issue about which I'm more interested). So I'd like
to reask my question again: how would you understand Wittgenstein's claims in
the Lectures? I think that many religious beliefs do not pretend to be
descriptions of empirical facts, and therefore one could say that there's no
contradiction between the atheist and the religious person. But there are many
other religious beliefs that at least seem to pretend to be descriptions of
empirical facts, and about which both an atheist and a religious person would
probably think that their beliefs are contradictory. Is Wittgenstein talking
about the first set of beliefs, or is he also talking about the second
, when he said that they're not contradictory? How can we know that they're
not contradictory, even when both the atheist and the religious person think
they are?
Regards,
Gerardo.
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
