Posted by:
Henry Bemis
(
)
Date: March 15, 2024 12:44PM
"I guess you make a good point, but I kind of think falling for goofy shit and believing nonsense indicates a little bit of a defect in the ability to think deeply. And I don’t mean goofy little shit like don’t cook with olive oil if it’s under 140° or spam is good for your arteries – I’m talking about life purpose and meaning and commitment to silly nonsense."
COMMENT: Well, your post here is based upon what you call "silly nonsense." That is a highly subjective, not to mention pejorative, characterization that you would have to defend by first identifying what beliefs you deem to be 'silly nonsense' and then defending such a view.
Moreover, when religion is involved, and metaphysics generally, one person's silly nonsense is another person's 'deep thinking.' There are numerous examples of this. Take the belief in a soul and/or life after death. To some, such beliefs are silly nonsense, but to others deep thinking. Whichever conclusion you make, there are "deep" arguments that support the latter preferred religious position, whether you or I accept them or not.
______________________________________________
"I don’t mean any offense to goofy fuckers, but just kind of strikes me like that. But only since I was a little kid."
COMMENT: People who are passively dismissive of all religious or metaphysical beliefs and ideas are in my experience usually ignorant of the basis for such beliefs. As such, the "offense" falls upon them, not the believer.
Here is a real-life example: Consider the following quote, arguing for the view that there is a soul and life after death:
"We are of course far from being able to confirm scientifically the theological world picture, but, it might, I believe, already be possible today to perceive by pure reason (without appealing to the faith in any religion), that the theological worldview is thoroughly compatible with all known data (including the conditions which prevail on our earth). . . . What I call the theological worldview is the idea, that the world and everything in it has meaning and reason, and in particular a good and indubitable meaning. It follows immediately that our worldly existence, since it has in itself at most a very dubious meaning, can only be means to the end of another existence. Since it [the present life] has in itself at most a very dubious meaning, [it] can only be means to the end of another existence. The idea that everything in the world has a meaning (reason) is an exact analogue of the principle that everything has a cause, on which rests all of science."
Now, is the idea expressed here; that is, the reality of life after death, "silly nonsense?" How about the argument from metaphysical meaning and reason that is being made? Is that silly nonsense or deep thinking?
The statement is by one of the greatest mathematicians and 'deep thinkers' of the 20th Century, Kurt Gödel, as quoted in Hao Wang, *Reflections on Kurt Gödel* (p. 216-217)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_G%C3%B6del