I am bringing Taylor’s account of authenticity into my PhD work concerning collaborative innovation in the public sector. I see this formulation of authenticity as having generative qualities towards a collective will among those relevant and affective actors engaged in efforts of collaborative innovation - where an emphasis upon co-creation is amplified.
Hi, very nice discussion here. About the detail about Calvinism and predetermination. I have been mostly Calvinist for about 10 years and made effort to study advanced theology. One thing I can tell for sure is that Calvinists ABsolutely do NOT believe that one's riches shows God's favor. We actually actively criticize the non-Calvinists (who are usually Pentecostals, Charismatics who ask people on TV to give them money and that God will reward for giving money). We believe God can make very bad people rich. There is ONE thing about money which Calvinists believe and that is that we should be very careful where we spend money, and that we should save money if we can, and that we should use it to help people. That's why Calvinists historically going back to Puritans have very plain and simple houses, and very basic unadorned churches and our own homes , which in itself may have been a response to the excess and riches shown in Catholic and Anglican churches. OF course I think this is not entirely self-less. This is like the outwardly passive aggressive piety. Another VERY important thing about Calvinists. While Calvinists do believe in pre-destination of salvation and damnation we absolutely do NOT believe that "therefore our actions don't matter much". I think in most Calvinist seminaries they teach that we as limited humans have to behave as if we do not know who is "chosen" or "saved" and who is not, so in all actions we believe that our actions and choices do matter. They teach that its just that God knows. You may ask "so what is the point of believing that God has chosen or condemned someone". The point is very important historically and in modern times. It means that some church officials such as priests, bishops, cardinals, or pastors CANNOT declare that someone is "anathema", or "excommunicated" as it is done in other churches. Someone cannot just say "that person is going to hell" for whatever reason, nor can someone earn their place in heaven by having a church official somehow "allow it"
Thank you so much for this comment, I didn't know any of this and it's great to learn so much from the audience. Another great example to be humble when speaking of things you don't know much about!
2:57 Alasdair MacIntyre famously (and proudly) does not hold a doctorate; and seeing that he is about the same age as Charles Taylor - in fact, he’s a bit older - the idea of him having been supervised by Taylor is factually wrong in several ways. I wonder who you might have meant though?
Stoics: wisdom, courage, justice, moderation. No compassion, however. Dostoyevski seemed to imagine Jesus as the person who always loves, no matter what (the Grand Inquisitor), even when it seems to be too late or too little.
You can't just claim that "you should not harm others." Why not? If the religious believer can't just assert that God exists and tells us what to do, then why can't the atheist claim that we should not harm others. Both sides are making a claim that is either true or not. But, neither side can prove they are right.
Thank you for this erudite discussion it certainly helped me in my ongoing attempts to understand what's going on these days.
Thank you so much for your kind comment, I'm glad we could be of help!
we were taught at AUTH University (Greece), his book "Intolerances of modernity, in the last year. Amazed and wise. Thank you very much sir.
How does this not have more views?!
I think you can guess :)
Just read this book, loved the commentary. Wish I had mates like you two interested in philosophy on this level. Cheers
Thank you mate, really appreciate it.
I have truly enjoyed this chat. I only wish it would have been setup more like a video. Still the subject was an amazing commentary. Thank you!
Thank you very much! Perhaps video is something we can look into for the future :)
I am bringing Taylor’s account of authenticity into my PhD work concerning collaborative innovation in the public sector. I see this formulation of authenticity as having generative qualities towards a collective will among those relevant and affective actors engaged in efforts of collaborative innovation - where an emphasis upon co-creation is amplified.
Hi, very nice discussion here. About the detail about Calvinism and predetermination. I have been mostly Calvinist for about 10 years and made effort to study advanced theology. One thing I can tell for sure is that Calvinists ABsolutely do NOT believe that one's riches shows God's favor. We actually actively criticize the non-Calvinists (who are usually Pentecostals, Charismatics who ask people on TV to give them money and that God will reward for giving money). We believe God can make very bad people rich.
There is ONE thing about money which Calvinists believe and that is that we should be very careful where we spend money, and that we should save money if we can, and that we should use it to help people. That's why Calvinists historically going back to Puritans have very plain and simple houses, and very basic unadorned churches and our own homes , which in itself may have been a response to the excess and riches shown in Catholic and Anglican churches. OF course I think this is not entirely self-less. This is like the outwardly passive aggressive piety.
Another VERY important thing about Calvinists. While Calvinists do believe in pre-destination of salvation and damnation we absolutely do NOT believe that "therefore our actions don't matter much". I think in most Calvinist seminaries they teach that we as limited humans have to behave as if we do not know who is "chosen" or "saved" and who is not, so in all actions we believe that our actions and choices do matter. They teach that its just that God knows. You may ask "so what is the point of believing that God has chosen or condemned someone". The point is very important historically and in modern times. It means that some church officials such as priests, bishops, cardinals, or pastors CANNOT declare that someone is "anathema", or "excommunicated" as it is done in other churches. Someone cannot just say "that person is going to hell" for whatever reason, nor can someone earn their place in heaven by having a church official somehow "allow it"
Thank you so much for this comment, I didn't know any of this and it's great to learn so much from the audience. Another great example to be humble when speaking of things you don't know much about!
You guys are terrific. Hope you are still creating videos
2:57 Alasdair MacIntyre famously (and proudly) does not hold a doctorate; and seeing that he is about the same age as Charles Taylor - in fact, he’s a bit older - the idea of him having been supervised by Taylor is factually wrong in several ways. I wonder who you might have meant though?
Stoics: wisdom, courage, justice, moderation. No compassion, however. Dostoyevski seemed to imagine Jesus as the person who always loves, no matter what (the Grand Inquisitor), even when it seems to be too late or too little.
You can't just claim that "you should not harm others." Why not? If the religious believer can't just assert that God exists and tells us what to do, then why can't the atheist claim that we should not harm others. Both sides are making a claim that is either true or not. But, neither side can prove they are right.
42:24 exceptionally bad take on Calvinism and reformed theology.