I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
This thread is for the discussion of the Introduction to "Sense and Goodness Without God."
-
In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 871 on Fri Apr 19, 2024 12:00 am
I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
- Chris OConnor
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 17024
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
- 21
- Location: Florida
- Has thanked: 3513 times
- Been thanked: 1309 times
- Gender:
- Contact:
- Robert Tulip
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6502
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
- 18
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 2723 times
- Been thanked: 2665 times
- Contact:
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
In the Introduction to Sense and Goodness Without God, Richard Carrier defines philosophy as the science of explaining to everyone the meaning and implications of what we say and think. A spiritual aimlessness, he says, comes from the divorce of human beings from a devoted exploration of philosophy, which should aim to be coherent, sensible and complete, well supported by evidence. To hit upon wisdom takes serious care.
Carrier says philosophy is his religion, with reading and thinking to get at the truth and root out error replacing religious ritual and devotion. His worldview of metaphysical naturalism excludes anything supernatural, while allowing the strange concession for an atheist that if God appeared his views would change.
His big questions are: if God does not exist then what does? Is there good and evil? Should we even care? How do we know what’s true anyway? Can we make any sense of this universe? Can we even make sense of our own lives?
Carrier says philosophy is his religion, with reading and thinking to get at the truth and root out error replacing religious ritual and devotion. His worldview of metaphysical naturalism excludes anything supernatural, while allowing the strange concession for an atheist that if God appeared his views would change.
His big questions are: if God does not exist then what does? Is there good and evil? Should we even care? How do we know what’s true anyway? Can we make any sense of this universe? Can we even make sense of our own lives?
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
I bought this book intending to give an objective overview of each chapter. Yet I can't find any disagreement. Richard Carrier expresses my own worldview to a T, and fills in some of the blanks on the way.
I highly encourage Flann or ant to pick this book up and engage in discussion. It would help to have source material to replace strawmen(ant). It would help to have a thorough explanation to find where we disagree(Flann).
While I have always referred to my worldview as philosophical naturalism, Carrier expresses his as metaphysical naturalism. I wonder if there is a difference.
I highly encourage Flann or ant to pick this book up and engage in discussion. It would help to have source material to replace strawmen(ant). It would help to have a thorough explanation to find where we disagree(Flann).
While I have always referred to my worldview as philosophical naturalism, Carrier expresses his as metaphysical naturalism. I wonder if there is a difference.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
I'm really not into fiction.
I prefer non fiction.
Thanks for the invite anyway.
I prefer non fiction.
Thanks for the invite anyway.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
ant wrote:I'm really not into fiction.
I prefer non fiction.
Thanks for the invite anyway.
I was only kidding.
I'm going to look for it on Kindle.
I had already thought of reading it.
- Flann 5
-
Nutty for Books
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
- 10
- Location: Dublin
- Has thanked: 831 times
- Been thanked: 705 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
Hi Interbane,
Thanks for the suggestion.I'll consider it.
So it's definitely non fiction? I enjoy your sense of humour ant.
Carrier I think, shares Robert's enthusiasm for mythologising Christianity, though not for D.M.Murdock!
Thanks, I'll think about reading it.
Thanks for the suggestion.I'll consider it.
So it's definitely non fiction? I enjoy your sense of humour ant.
Carrier I think, shares Robert's enthusiasm for mythologising Christianity, though not for D.M.Murdock!
Thanks, I'll think about reading it.
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
I encourage you to participate. It's the perfect opportunity to see what a naturalist believes that is more than mere atheism. Carrier has already mentioned a few things I think Robert and I have sparred over.
Disagreement with Plato's version of idealism, where ideas are seen as entities rather than as byproducts of the compression of concepts into words.
The idea that absolute certainty is unviable. Although rather than use confidence level terminology, he refers to things as levels of certainty, which I'm okay with but don't see myself changing. Part of his description is an appeal to the Cartesian demon. While certainty is unfounded, so is belief that our reality is an illusion.
Disagreement with Plato's version of idealism, where ideas are seen as entities rather than as byproducts of the compression of concepts into words.
The idea that absolute certainty is unviable. Although rather than use confidence level terminology, he refers to things as levels of certainty, which I'm okay with but don't see myself changing. Part of his description is an appeal to the Cartesian demon. While certainty is unfounded, so is belief that our reality is an illusion.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- Flann 5
-
Nutty for Books
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
- 10
- Location: Dublin
- Has thanked: 831 times
- Been thanked: 705 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
Ok,Interbane, Sounds interesting.I'll do like ant and get it on kindle.That way I can't burn it!
Thanks.
Ok, Got it on kindle eventually.
Thanks.
Ok, Got it on kindle eventually.
Last edited by Flann 5 on Mon Aug 18, 2014 5:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
Flann 5 wrote:Ok,Interbane, Sounds interesting.I'll do like ant and get it on kindle.That way I can't burn it!
Thanks.
Ok, Got it on kindle eventually.
And for 3 bucks you cant go wrong! (or can you?)
- Flann 5
-
Nutty for Books
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
- 10
- Location: Dublin
- Has thanked: 831 times
- Been thanked: 705 times
Re: I. Introduction - "Sense and Goodness Without God"
Hi ant, Yes,not a bad price.After reading the intro and second chapter though,I guess wisdom is not available at that price!
Quite a Hitchen's, Harris and Dawkin's like outburst of anger and supposedly reasoned attack on the bible and Christianity. I hardly know where to start.Anyway, I'll think about it,maybe read his 'critique' again and say something here then.
Quite a Hitchen's, Harris and Dawkin's like outburst of anger and supposedly reasoned attack on the bible and Christianity. I hardly know where to start.Anyway, I'll think about it,maybe read his 'critique' again and say something here then.