Tag Archives: teleological argument
Fine Tuning and Blunt Retooling
Lately I’ve been reading a lovely little book by Owen Gingerich, Harvard Professor Emeritus of Astronomy and History of Science. It’s titled God’s Universe, and – as you can guess – its aim is to make clear that faith and … Continue reading
Posted in Absolute Freedom and Terror, absurdism, academe, action, afterlife, art, art of living, atheism, autonomy, bad faith, Bible, Biblical God, books, Christianity, class, conformism, contemplation, contradictions, cool, courage, courtship, cultural politics, culture, desire, dialectic, erotic life, eternity, ethics, evil, existentialism, exploitation, faith, fashion, female power, femininity, freedom, friendship, gender balance, glitterati, guilt and innocence, health, hegemony, hidden God, hierarchy, history of ideas, id, Idealism-, ideality, identity, ideology, idolatry, institutional power, Jews, journalism, Judaism, life and death struggle, literature, love, male power, masculinity, master, memory, modern women, modernism, moral action, moral evaluation, moral psychology, morality, mortality, ontology, oppression, past and future, philosophy, politics of ideas, postmodernism, power, presence, promissory notes, propaganda, psychology, public facade, public intellectual, reading, reductionism, relationships, religion, roles, science, scientism, secular, seduction, self-deception, sex appeal, sexuality, social climbing, social construction, social conventions, social ranking, sociobiology, spiritual journey, spiritual not religious, spirituality, status, status of women, suffering, terror, the examined life, the problematic of men, the problematic of woman, the profane, the sacred, theism, theology, time, twentieth century, twenty-first century, Utopia, victimhood, victims, violence, war, work, writing, Zeitgeist
Tagged Abraham and Pharaoh, Abraham's obedience, anthropic principle, asteroids and extinction, atheists vs theists, battle of gods and giants, book of Genesis, cosmic fine tuning, cultural diversity, Darwinism and Evolutionary theory, design argument, dinosaurs and the Flood, divine history, divine partnership, divine purpose, divine trial and error, evidence of design, expulsion from Eden, fine tuning argument, Garden of Eden, generation before the Flood, global culture, God's and our work in progress, God's call to Abraham, God's partnership with us, God's promise to Noah, Harvard science professor, His eye is on the sparrow, human trial and error, intelligent design vs survival of the fittest, lech lecha, Mark Twain on the bible, mass extinction, New Atheists, Noachide commandments, O-O-O God, origin of life, our partnership with God, Owen Gingerich's God's Universe, Pierre Lecomte du Nouy, Plato's war between gods and giants, postlapsarian, prelapsarian, providence versus chance, religious diversity, Sarah and Abraham, social engineering, teleological argument, Torah Study, Tower of Babel, utopian thinking, war between gods and giants
2 Comments
“What Are We Really Arguing About Now?”
“What Are We Really Arguing About Now?” My recent columns were about “argument” in the philosopher’s sense of reasoning. Thinking they might find them of special interest, I’ve sent the columns to philosopher friends. And was pleased, but not surprised, … Continue reading
Posted in Absolute Freedom and Terror, absurdism, academe, action, alienation, art, art of living, atheism, autonomy, beauty, books, cities, class, conformism, contemplation, contradictions, cool, courage, cultural politics, culture, desire, dialectic, erotic life, eternity, ethics, evil, existentialism, exploitation, faith, fashion, femininity, feminism, freedom, friendship, gender balance, glitterati, Gnosticism, guilt and innocence, health, Hegel, hegemony, heroes, hidden God, hierarchy, history of ideas, idealism, ideality, identity, ideology, idolatry, institutional power, legal responsibility, life and death struggle, literature, male power, masculinity, memoir, memory, mind control, modernism, moral action, moral evaluation, moral psychology, morality, mortality, ontology, past and future, Phenomenology of the Mind, philosophy, politics of ideas, postmodernism, power, presence, promissory notes, public facade, public intellectual, reading, reductionism, relationships, secular, seduction, self-deception, social construction, social conventions, social ranking, spiritual journey, spiritual not religious, status, status of women, the examined life, the problematic of men, the problematic of woman, the profane, the sacred, theology, time, twentieth century, twenty-first century, Utopia, work, writing, Zeitgeist
Tagged Albert Camus, arguing to win, argument, argument from authority, argument from design, argument from observation, bad arguments, Bloomsbury group, Cheryl Misak’s Frank Ramsey: A Sheer Excess of Powers, conscious assumptions, conscious reasons, de Beauvoir’s Paris, drama of argument, famous philosophers, folk theology, forcing the argument, Frank Ramsey, Freud, Freud’s Vienna, global citizens, global culture, globalization, Gnosticism, human imperfection, human incompleteness, imperfect people, inspiration, intuitions, life purposes, life-defining argument, life-shaping argument, manipulative argument, necessary imperfections, opinion shapers, philosopher friends, philosophic argument, philosophic life world, realm of argument, reason, reasoning, rejecting the world, resisting the human condition, rhetorical tricks, Socrates in Athens, Stephen Toulmin’s and Allan Janick’s Wittgenstein’s Vienna, tales of argument, teleological argument, Tennessee farmers, the human condition, the perfect is the enemy of the good, unconscious assumptions, unstated subtexts, utopian ideals, verbal victories, Wittgenstein, world citizens, world city, world culture, world of ideas
Leave a comment
