Neutral Monism is of course the easiest starting point: (1) noumenal objective reality exits; (2) the phenomenological world exists; (3) mind & matter may somehow be the same substance. That was what both Russell & Santayana proposed.
Consciousness seems like a much easier starting point. As Max Planck, the Nobel prize winning physicist who discovered quantum theory, puts it: "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." Source: Max Planck, as quoted in _The Observer_ (25 January 1931)
@@edlabonte7773 Embrace the mystery. There is no solving it, and it is beautiful "To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms-this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness.“
Clearly this is exactly what he is saying, everything is problematic and we can't be sure, but we have to speak about things still, even if we don't really know what it means to speak or what we are saying. We must make choices and have convictions in order to function. we can't be certain of our uncertainty, but we can still speak of it because we make commitments in order to be able to speak.
@@wan82541 That comment echoes Philo of Larissa, a good starting place. Though, the school of Plato improved in the following generations, in my opinion.
I'm inclined to be an idealist, craving for God and meaning and I subscribe to what Prof. Ward is saying up to a point. But for me Christianity as it exists here in Poland is a nightmare I'm happy to have woken up from. I'm not against Christianity as such, I'm just pro truth, good, justice and clarity. For me Christianity is reasonable only when it's not taken literally. And when there's place for independent thought. Even besides that, for me it is too antropocentric, narrow minded and self-centered to be a viable worldview. But I'm open to what Christians have to say, when what they say applies to the world outside of their mental bubble. I'm open to good ideas from everyone. And Prof. Ward has good ideas.
I think individual Christian groups do not affirm or deny the veracity of Christianity. Start with the claims of the witnesses of Christ, in the first century and their background. Hypocrisy and modern distortion is just the human condition.
How do you mean by "Christianity being narrow minded"? ... How much do you know about Christ, His life and teachings and the Apostles, and the works of all the great Scholars who were Christians including Dr. Ward?
Mr Ward knows how to get to the heart of the matter and I feel resonance with his conviction. What a hero.
Excellent. Keith Ward is my favorite modern living theologian.
yes he does. I've thought the same.
A claim that Kant did not believe in God is even more astounding than the claim that Aristotle was an idealist!
Excellent.
I love his accent
Well, we thought Kant died a while back. Apparently not. Wait ... maybe reincarnation is true.
Professor Ward almost make' me want to become an Anglican .
Neutral Monism is of course the easiest starting point: (1) noumenal objective reality exits; (2) the phenomenological world exists; (3) mind & matter may somehow be the same substance. That was what both Russell & Santayana proposed.
Consciousness seems like a much easier starting point. As Max Planck, the Nobel prize winning physicist who discovered quantum theory, puts it: "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness."
Source: Max Planck, as quoted in _The Observer_ (25 January 1931)
But it doesn't really resolve the mystery, it just moves it off into an equally mysterious "neutral" space.
@@edlabonte7773 Embrace the mystery. There is no solving it, and it is beautiful
"To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms-this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness.“
Are you certain that you aren't certain of anything?
ahhhh a paradox! :O
Not Ned, isn't it amazing how they spin that out with complete confidence? My favorite, however, is "There are no absolutes."
Clearly this is exactly what he is saying, everything is problematic and we can't be sure, but we have to speak about things still, even if we don't really know what it means to speak or what we are saying. We must make choices and have convictions in order to function. we can't be certain of our uncertainty, but we can still speak of it because we make commitments in order to be able to speak.
Also: uncertainty is problematic, but certainty is just as problematic!
@@wan82541 That comment echoes Philo of Larissa, a good starting place. Though, the school of Plato improved in the following generations, in my opinion.
I am a Russellian Realization Theory supporter
Aristole was an idealist? No way...
Plato was. Even Kant was idealist only in epistemological sense...but not metaphysically..
The idea that life cannot be explained in material terms stems from Aristotle.
I'm inclined to be an idealist, craving for God and meaning and I subscribe to what Prof. Ward is saying up to a point. But for me Christianity as it exists here in Poland is a nightmare I'm happy to have woken up from. I'm not against Christianity as such, I'm just pro truth, good, justice and clarity. For me Christianity is reasonable only when it's not taken literally. And when there's place for independent thought. Even besides that, for me it is too antropocentric, narrow minded and self-centered to be a viable worldview. But I'm open to what Christians have to say, when what they say applies to the world outside of their mental bubble. I'm open to good ideas from everyone. And Prof. Ward has good ideas.
I think individual Christian groups do not affirm or deny the veracity of Christianity. Start with the claims of the witnesses of Christ, in the first century and their background. Hypocrisy and modern distortion is just the human condition.
How do you mean by "Christianity being narrow minded"? ... How much do you know about Christ, His life and teachings and the Apostles, and the works of all the great Scholars who were Christians including Dr. Ward?