The Secular Frontier

"Concept/conceive/understand" are etymologically related to the hand/grasping in either (sort of) Greek or Latin etymology, e.g., "I was able to grasp his meaning." The words "concept," "conceive," and "understand" have etymological connections to the idea of "grasping" or "seizing" in Latin, though not directly tied to the hand in Greek. Here's a breakdown: Concept and Conceive: Both derive from the Latin verb concipere (to take in, grasp, or conceive), which is a compound of com- (together) and capere (to take or seize). The sense of "grasping" here metaphorically extends to mental comprehension or forming ideas, as in "grasping a concept" or "conceiving an idea." The root capere is strongly associated with physical grasping or holding (e.g., "capture" also comes from capere). Understand: This word has a different origin, from Old English understandan (to comprehend, literally "to stand under"). It doesn't directly relate to grasping or the hand in its etymology. However, the metaphorical use of "g ... Read Article

Large scale war and mass atrocities have been afficting humanity since the advent of civilization. So who is most to blame for these disasters? According to the religion industry if most or all folks would just be good and obedient sheep and behave themselves by following the dictates of whatever deity a particular brand of theism promotes, then peace would reign over the planet. Theists especially conservative often contend that the atheism that has become popular in the 1900s on is exceptionally dangerous because of the tens of millions who godless communists have liquidated, particularly over a short period in the ;ast century. Of late some atheists, many Christians especially conservative, and Hindus have asserted that Islam particularly of the militant flavor has become an exceptional threat to global security.             To figure this out in a defintive paper is a matter of stastitics. The death tolls for given wars and other events ... Read Article

These days many who are secular and/or on the center-left just don’t get why so many on the evangelical right seem so darn dead set against the threat of global climate change, to the point they thrill in chanting “drill, baby, drill!” After crude is slimy, smelly, icky stuff, and the refined products are not all that refined. Many may imagine that if duly educated about the science of CO2 driven atmospheric and ocean warming and acidification a fair number of theocons will come around to agreeing on prudent steps to cut down on mass transferring fossil carbon from underground into the sky and sea.              Don’t hold your breath on that.              To understand why oil in particular has a special place on the hearts of theocons, we go back to 1800s America when Puritanical Calvinism was still dominant. The Bible is as usual contradictory when it comes to weal ... Read Article

We looked at the idea last time of the understanding relationship we have with the world, and so for example this is manifest in the encounter with beings founded on an understanding of their Being, which is conspicuous in allegory like Plato’s allegory – sense image of the cave in the Republic.  And so, for example, the traditional way of looking at the human since the metaphysic’s of Plato is man stands in a ‘true relation – encounter’ with beings which is made conspicuous when it breaks down, the example we gave of mis-perceiving a living thing at our feet in the forest only to look down and see I “mist took” rustling dead leaves in the wind “as” a living thing.  Descartes thus thought this framework through to its ground seeing such error is possible because perception is being understood as based on certainty (free from doubt) out of a Christian tradition from Thomas to Luther because for that tradition what had to be certain (free from doubt) as the highest understanding w ... Read Article

Last time I ended with: For example, when we think of experience in a modern way, we usually think of sense vs thought.  But if we reflect back on Plato, the sensuous is not just the immediate but also the most thoughtful and the true place for thought to be born, like Plato’s sense image / allegory of the cave in the Republic, and so Heidegger says “Do we then never get beyond the allegorical? No and yes; for, conversely, the most sensuous language and images are indeed never merely “sensuous” but are at first (not “superveniently”) something understood. (Heidegger, Martin. Contributions to Philosophy (Of the Event) (Studies in Continental Thought) (p. 269). Indiana University Press. Kindle Edition). This is a genuine and thoughtful opening of a path of inquiry seldom travelled, and opposed to dogma, religious or otherwise Let's unpack this: What is Antisthenes position about addressing things and how does Plato critique Antisthenes in "The Sophist" ? Antisthenes, a foun ... Read Article

“Faith has no place in thought” (Heidegger, Anaximander’s Saying [1946, pg 280]) "Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not, nor of what sort they may be …” (Protagoras, On the Gods) Protagoras was a proponent of either agnosticism or, as Tim Whitmarsh claims, atheism, on the grounds that since he held that if something is not able to be known it can be considered not to exist.  In the same way, I can’t disprove the existence of an invisible, immaterial unicorn in my room, but am reasonable in considering it not to exist. In modern times we might marvel at people who claim their god can do anything except appear and say hello. It’s remarkable all these centuries later how short we come to living up to Protagoras’s insight.  Anyone can look at American politics and be dismayed at how politicians are expected to embrace and announce their superstitions (Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Scientologist, Astrology, etc.).  It’s against such thing ... Read Article

We have an inauthentic disposition toward death: living "as though" the next moment won't be denied us, though it certainly might get denied. How we decide about this inevitability transforms our life. Heidegger comments: Death, as the extremity of the “there,” is at the same time what is innermost to a possible complete transformation of the “there.” Also lying in this is a reference to the deepest essence of nothingness ... It would certainly be easy to account for what has just been said about death by fitting that into the untested, everyday notions of the “end” and “nothingness” instead of doing the opposite, i.e., learning to surmise how, with the steadfast and transporting incorporation of death into the “there,” the essence of the “end” and of “nothingness” must be transformed... Running ahead toward death is not the same as willing nothingness in the usual sense; on the contrary, it is the highest Da-sein, the one that incorporates the concealedness of the “there� ... Read Article

So, Trump got a bit of a setback recently when 3 judges (including one Trump appointed) in a court on international trade ruled he didn't have the power to impose tariffs. An appeals court paused the ruling giving both parties the opportunity to present their cases in writing, and Trump had to stipulate that if he lost the appeal the government would compensate everyone hurt by the unlawful tariffs (if they are ruled unlawful). Here's a brief take from MSNBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vyjddkGHMc Now, Trump's problem is that Trump tariffing the world was not based on an emergency, but rather just a power grab, as he explains himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWLTayuuzs Now, how does Trump plan to overcome this latest legal hurdle? Let's look at his takes: See the move? Trump needed an emergency situation to justify his seizing of Tariff powers and at a time where no one was thinking of imposing Tariff sanctions on the USA Trump tariffed the world and so created hi ... Read Article

Heidegger notes somewhere there was a story from the war (I don't recall whether it was WW1 or WW2) where a report was made that a fort had been taken and in fact the officer looked at the fort in the distance and saw a friendly flag was flying. The disaster came when the soldiers approached the fort "as though" it was friendly only to find out the flag had been "mis-perceived" and the fort was still in control of the enemy. The two-fold lesson is that we deal with life according to an "as though" disposition, and the "mis-taking" of the flag "as" friendly shows we are always "taking as." And so, the false report became what the Greeks called the "hupokeimenon" for the "mis-taking" of the flag "as" friendly in a false-seeing. Similarly, Heidegger gives the example of hearing a living thing in the forest only to look down and see you "mis-took" rustling dead leaves in the wing "as" a living thing. Our "stance-toward" the world is "taking as," either correctly or incorrectly. Now, the history of philos ... Read Article

Sorry it's been a while since I've posted on Heidegger and Greek Philosophy. Let's get back to his "Contributions" book. Of critical importance of a thorough secular reading here is the Greek metaphysical position that "he psyche ta onta pos estin," which we translate as "the soul is in a way the things (CTP 247)." When we consider beings "as such," we tacitly adopt a whole host of ontological structures like einai/Being, choris/separate from, ton allown/the others, and kath auto/in itself. These ground my ability to stand in relation to beings. I encounter the dog as it is in itself/not me, for instance. The question of Da-sein always arises when the question of beings "as such" arises (CTP, 250). The Greeks interpreted the thinker in relation to Life, that the thinker was not close to life, but rather like an awkward kid at a party wishing he could fit in. In this way Nietzsche rethought the self in terms of the Body and hence thought of disposition as more primordial than thinking. Heidegger sa ... Read Article

WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics, the Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli present nine objections against the Swoon Theory (the view that Jesus only fainted on the cross, survived his crucifixion, and at some later time met up with some of his disciples leading those disciples to sincerely but mistakenly conclude that God had raised Jesus from the dead). Their Objection #4, which I call the Winding Sheets & Entombment Objection, includes this sub-argument for a key premise of the core argument of that objection: 3b. According to the Gospel of John (Jn 19:38-42), on Friday evening, after Jesus’ body was removed from the cross, it was totally encased in winding sheets (that included 100-plus pounds of spices and a gummy substance). B. The Gospel of John provides a reliable and accurate account of the life of Jesus, including what happened to Jesus’ body after he was crucified. THEREFORE: 1b. On Friday evening, after J ... Read Article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isJJiiGqSS4&t Dr. Bob sides with Prof Nina Livesey! See 1:49:14 ... Read Article

WHERE WE ARE In the first post of this series, I conceded that Spinoza's primary objection against miracles fails, because Spinoza mistakenly assumed that the laws of nature were deterministic. In the 20th century, science has shown that some laws of nature involve probability and chance, and that natural phenomena can sometimes be random. However, a different objection against miracles by Spinoza seems more promising: humans cannot determine when an event was caused by God as opposed to some other supernatural being (e.g. a demon, an angel, a finite god, or a human with supernatural powers). I added to this point by Spinoza the claim that the term "miracle" should be understood to imply that the event in question was intentionally brought about by God. The combination of Spinoza's point and my definition of "miracle" implies that humans cannot determine whether an alleged miracle is an actual miracle, so humans are not capable of identifying an event as being a miracle. I pointed out that thi ... Read Article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gqCg5ZaSOI This was fun. I have a three-article series on this topic under review so hopefully they will see the light of day! ... Read Article

SPINOZA'S MAIN ARGUMENT AGAINST MIRACLES FAILS Spinoza's main argument against miracles is that everything that happens is according to God's will. Furthermore, God is not fickle nor does God act on the basis of whim or fancy. God KNOWS what God wants and everything that happens happens precisely because that was exactly what God wanted to happen. Thus, every event in the universe is determined by God's eternal and unchanging will or plan. Miracles are, according to Spinoza, contrary to the natural order of the universe. But for Spinoza, God is the natural order of the universe. That is, God's will or plan for the universe is orderly and lawlike. God does not arbitrarily select this or that to happen, God wills unchanging universal laws or principles and everything that happens is determined by those unchanging universal laws. The only way that something could happen that was contrary to the unchanging universal laws that direct everything and every event in the universe is for something to hap ... Read Article