It's not a dirty word to us. It's our nature.

humans are [GASP!]...Fallible!

you want some examples??????

That rational thinking works pretty good until ya throw a wrench in the works .. introduce religion. And poof there it goes. I'll probably get flamed for this moment but that will just prove my point.

Your idea does not prove their idea false.

You're just missing the connections.

Furthermore, saying "philosophers say" is embarrassing non-sense, as if they'd agree with you, that they all agree. They clearly, along with academics, all hold slightly different feelings on the matter.
What you are doing would be like a philosopher saying "Religions say"

it's non-sense. Take a singular argument, and attack it. Otherwise you're just a crazy person yelling in to the air or at windmills.

You're attempting to summarize all philosophers and academics then attacking what you have deemed their average collective idea, but that is not a genuine debate, because by doing that, you are in fact debating none of them. Because you've altered all of their ideas, and omitted just enough things, to group them together. It's intellectually disingenuous and will never have you taken seriously by anyone that understands these ideas beyond their surfaces and summaries.

Of course we are, isn’t that the point? Nothing is going to be perfect. You move forward with the knowledge that you’ll take missteps, and fail. But you move forward anyway.

And I have to ask - does that prove a point about rational thinking or does that prove a point about religion?

Valid summary. I did not name all the specific philosophers on a TMan thread (it gets boring) and the summary is my own with a tinge of completeness as philosophers are known for 10 pages on one thought.

Why the argument against the whole of the submission Q?
You are as the sociologists who won't discuss matters in another realm as "some" deem it of no consequence.
It's just a trapping thread where we banter.
You brought a machete and a chain saw to a straw fight.

Perhaps you could enlighten us at your convenience?

Blessings,
Mark

but, there *IS* "perfection", if you choose to BELIEVE it.

That, is your choice.

And you will reap the consequences of your choice.

Speaking of philosophers, who was it who said:

If God is God, He is not good.

If God is good, he is not god.

Not a test; I don't remember who said it first.

Jim

White Marlin, perfection is a human construct. It doesn’t exist in nature.

sure, it does!

Beauty, diversity, heck, even precision are not the same as perfection. It’s by definition unattainable in nature. There are too many variables.

I'd weigh in that given the intricacies of nature in countless areas of very exacting specificities, many believe that design points to a Designer.
Since the Big Bang theory has a mathematical possibility of 1 with 48 zeros after it, I'm in the camp that believes the Designer knew where to stack the Legos.
Exactly.

is not a tree, "perfection"?

if not, how would YOU design it?

I've never heard that the mathematical probability of the Big Bang is one in 1 followed by 48 zeros, and I've read a fair number of books on the subject.

It is true (astrophysicists believe) that some force or factor set the controls for certain constants in our universe, like the speed of light in a vacuum, at fixed values that allow matter and life to exist. That force might be called God.

If the gravitational constant was a different number, matter either could not form or all of it would collapse into a giant black hole in the center of the universe.

And yes, the odds against every control being set just right are enormous. But if not here, where else could we exist? The odds may be great, but we know it happened at least once. Maybe there are other "pocket universes" where the controls are set differently and life is impossible.


Jim

Wow. I wish I possessed the expertise to define people or tell them how they are wrong based solely on what they say here.

Here is a question to ponder. If God is omnipotent, omniscient, everywhere present, and infinitely loving, does man have a freewill that gives him (man) the ability to go contrary to the will of God?

Probably because man believes in a form of modernistic humanism which is a belief in the goodness of man. Man through his belief in freewill and self-righteousness believes that through his own goodness he has come to earn and deserve eternal happiness.

The orthodox (traditional) Christian doctrines help with;
The Bible's purpose and about the Creator characteristics (Exodus 34:6-7) which He Inspired human authors to write.
Listing key revelations of Creation, Scripture, and Son.
Outlining the Divine purpose (Gen. 3) of the Gospel - of Salvation by Grace through faith in Christ alone and not by our works.
and more.

Much around the periphery we debate.

Blessings,
Mark

Insightful for sure.
Since the early centuries, theologians have met to discuss heretical teachings such as Arianism and more recent Unitarianism Universalists for example, who openly promote that they are seeking as humans to find truth, while they claim the Bible as their authority (the parts they like).

There's always tension as we, the finite, attempt to figure out the infinite.

Blessings,
Mark