Before starting my responses, I would like to make an apology for the delay in replying. I am really enjoying having discussions with you guys.
Thank you all for your kind attention.
Psychology deals with human behaviourism. It only deals with hard facts, means it can’t answer why we have phenomenal experiences and what in fact are those. Factually, science can’t explicate anything which transcends the boundaries of matter.
As for faith, check this quote:
Quote
Faith cannot be solely analysed as something negative, irrational or as Camus would picture it, compared to a blind leap onwards. Faith, according to German philosopher should be always engaged from the standpoint in which it is strictly related to human knowledge.
Second argument raised by Jaspers is that faith should not be analysed from subject-object division. If phenomenons of existence are looked upon on basis of these two categories, the problem of transcendence in regard to the human desire for totality becomes impossible to achieve. The transcendent being, according to Jaspers cannot be understood in such manner, making space for one of the most interesting concepts of Jaspers’ philosophy – das Umgreifende – encompassing. The understanding of the transcendent as encompassing allows to look upon it without treating the transcendence as the object of human endeavour. The encompassing is, from what we start and towards which we proceed in our existence without dogmatizing the lively human thought. The encompassing is founded both on the existence – as the external world of phenomena and the internal world of experience, on the consciousness relating to the object of perception and in spirit as the idea inside me and the idea i am confronted with. …
…Faith, reaching towards the encompassing must be done in full awareness of freedom, granting an open status of the existence, not allowing the individual to withdraw towards establishing a permanent feeling of understanding or objectifying the transcendent. The only way towards such belief leads through philosophical standpoints, founded on Kantian critique and existential understanding of human condition. THIS MEANS THAT THE PARTICIPATION IN TRANSCENDENCE CANNOT BE APPROACHED WITH THE ELIMINATION OF THE NATURAL PHENOMENOLOGICAL ASPECT OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE AND REASONING.
Page 343
Essay by Maciej Kałuza
Transcendental in Philosophy of Faith (paper)
Transcendentalism Overturned (book)
You are wrong in stating, “As to its cause - we do not even know if there can be a cause”. We have firm evidences on philosophical and scientific grounds that Universe has a Cause. What was that cause? It’s a different area of discourse.
Do you have any scientific proof in support of your statement “UNIVERSE IS NOT AN AGENT” or is it only your opinion?
Without knowing Quran, you can’t distinguish between right and wrong. None of Atheist scholars (including staunchest of all Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Krauss, etc.) is using any of those false allegations to prove Quran to be wrong in their debates (especially with the Muslim Scholars) neither have they mentioned any of those allegations in their writings.
All non-Muslim scholars discern exactly why those false accusations are floating over the net. The purpose of these web sites is only to spread misconceptions about Quran. It is something similar to the spreading of wrong meaning of Jihaad (to strive) by replacing it with the meaning (Holy War against non-Muslims). Word for war in Arabic is Qitaal.
Thank you all for your kind attention.
(August 31, 2013 at 7:18 am)genkaus Wrote: Faith is a convenient excuse for intellectual laziness or incapacity. Believing in something is not the same as having faith - especially if that belief is justified. Your personal interests are molded according to your understanding of the world - so your simplistic statement interests molding the understanding is not only wrong, its foolish. This applies to phenomenological concepts as well - which are well within range of scientific inquiry. As a matter of fact, the science that studies them is referred to as psychology.
Psychology deals with human behaviourism. It only deals with hard facts, means it can’t answer why we have phenomenal experiences and what in fact are those. Factually, science can’t explicate anything which transcends the boundaries of matter.
As for faith, check this quote:
Quote
Faith cannot be solely analysed as something negative, irrational or as Camus would picture it, compared to a blind leap onwards. Faith, according to German philosopher should be always engaged from the standpoint in which it is strictly related to human knowledge.
Second argument raised by Jaspers is that faith should not be analysed from subject-object division. If phenomenons of existence are looked upon on basis of these two categories, the problem of transcendence in regard to the human desire for totality becomes impossible to achieve. The transcendent being, according to Jaspers cannot be understood in such manner, making space for one of the most interesting concepts of Jaspers’ philosophy – das Umgreifende – encompassing. The understanding of the transcendent as encompassing allows to look upon it without treating the transcendence as the object of human endeavour. The encompassing is, from what we start and towards which we proceed in our existence without dogmatizing the lively human thought. The encompassing is founded both on the existence – as the external world of phenomena and the internal world of experience, on the consciousness relating to the object of perception and in spirit as the idea inside me and the idea i am confronted with. …
…Faith, reaching towards the encompassing must be done in full awareness of freedom, granting an open status of the existence, not allowing the individual to withdraw towards establishing a permanent feeling of understanding or objectifying the transcendent. The only way towards such belief leads through philosophical standpoints, founded on Kantian critique and existential understanding of human condition. THIS MEANS THAT THE PARTICIPATION IN TRANSCENDENCE CANNOT BE APPROACHED WITH THE ELIMINATION OF THE NATURAL PHENOMENOLOGICAL ASPECT OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE AND REASONING.
Page 343
Essay by Maciej Kałuza
Transcendental in Philosophy of Faith (paper)
Transcendentalism Overturned (book)
(August 31, 2013 at 7:18 am)genkaus Wrote: More bullshit. We define what constitutes "running systematically" based on how the universe runs. Saying that the universe runs "systematically" is tautological. Further, the universe is not an agent - so the question of controlling anything and anyone is foolish. As to its cause - we do not even know if there can be a cause - so quranic speculations on its existence and nature are also bullshit.
You are wrong in stating, “As to its cause - we do not even know if there can be a cause”. We have firm evidences on philosophical and scientific grounds that Universe has a Cause. What was that cause? It’s a different area of discourse.
Do you have any scientific proof in support of your statement “UNIVERSE IS NOT AN AGENT” or is it only your opinion?
(August 31, 2013 at 7:18 am)genkaus Wrote: So I'm guessing you must have proven each and every one of errors and contradictions presented to be wrong and the website hosting them must have realized the error of their ways and taken them down? No? Then you are simply blinding yourself to the unnatural parts of the quran - and therefore, blind faith.
Without knowing Quran, you can’t distinguish between right and wrong. None of Atheist scholars (including staunchest of all Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Krauss, etc.) is using any of those false allegations to prove Quran to be wrong in their debates (especially with the Muslim Scholars) neither have they mentioned any of those allegations in their writings.
All non-Muslim scholars discern exactly why those false accusations are floating over the net. The purpose of these web sites is only to spread misconceptions about Quran. It is something similar to the spreading of wrong meaning of Jihaad (to strive) by replacing it with the meaning (Holy War against non-Muslims). Word for war in Arabic is Qitaal.
