[C] [Wittrs] Re: Wittgenstein on Religious Belief
- From: "J D" <ubersicht@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:12:49 -0000
Gerardo,
I think it comes down in part to asking a believer, "Okay, so do you mean...?"
But that's something people seldom take the time to do.
If you're debating someone like a Creation Scientist, you'll probably find all
sorts of substantive claims with which to disagree. And that's partly because
they are explicitly trying to make their religious beliefs part of the language
games of biology, geology, history, anthropology, and so forth.
But there are many believers who would reject a lot of the Creation Scientist's
claims. And when you try to pin them down to something, they'll say, "No, I
don't mean that. You've got it wrong."
Evasion? Sometimes that may be. Other times, their behavior and their whole
life seem to demonstrate sincere belief.
Take a Hassidic Jew, a Talmud scholar whose views are largely derived from
Moses Maimonides (hardly a post-modern liberal theologian) who emphasizes
negative theology and when asked about such pictures of G-d and His works as
the Creation Scientist would emphasize, would call this IDOLATRY! These
anthropomorphic approaches to G-d are only properly a means for men's limited
faculties to grasp what is morally important. But if you aren't very careful
with them, you engage in a sin!
While some of what he says about the anthropomorphisms serving a moral purpose
will sound like the "fictionalism" in the essay you shared (and it's noteworthy
that Maimonides made these points in the Middle Ages) but on other points, he
will say that no, G-d is not a metaphor for this or that, and so forth.
It's quite difficult to pinpoint where I might disagree and yet...
JPDeMouy
> (Gerardo) In which cases you think we could say so? (that "they can't even
> really disagree"). Could you give some examples?
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
