On the other hand where things get tricky Descartes comes in a begins this explanation of mind and body. The dualism that he makes clear of these two things as separate. I think that a good example of something that comes into play with reasoning and logic versus the absolute truth or beliefs is simply religion. Like the example or Teressa which we discussed in class, I find it very hard to believe that the cause of this was 'jesus' or 'god'. Although I am a faithful person myself and I have gone to a catholic church since I was a little girls, my reasoning and logic kicks in more so than the idea that there is an over powering god who controls many things. It's similar to Descartes idea that there are two separate things that need to work together. Although mind and body can be combined although two different things, there are also possibilities to ponder in this world that don't work as well as the mind and body together. This is the point I really took away from our weeks work during class.

An example of this is found in peoples beliefs about prayer and other sort of religious activity. Beliefs should be a key word in this idea. When someone is brought up in a society believing in a high power than where does reason come in? It's a conflicting idea. If a god is above and controlling everything than things that we want to make sense of sometimes don't line up. If prayer is suppose to be something you do to be thankful and ask for needs, and it doesn't pan out the way a person plans where does modern science versus religion come in. If there is a plan for everything than why do we question anything? If there is someone who knows what they are doing why do we try so hard to prove points that have no other purpose. For me this is a hard concept to really, completely grasp. There really is no good middle point. One can either believe in a god who controls our universe etc. etc. or they can believe in reason and rationality and explanations for everything that happens in this life. I think we would all like to believe that there may be some gray spot that everyone could agree on, but in this case that is not a possibility.
I respectfully disagree with your closing. "There really is no good middle point. One can either believe in a god who controls our universe etc. etc. or they can believe in reason and rationality and explanations for everything that happens in this life. I think we would all like to believe that there may be some gray spot that everyone could agree on, but in this case that is not a possibility." You're right there is no gray area where everyone can agree, but we can, at least, agree to disagree (as I have with my brother-in-law who is an atheist while I am Christian).
ReplyDeleteMy sister and I discuss religion all the time, and while I believe there is a God, I also take science as truth. Maybe I'm a hypocrite, picking and choosing what to believe because it's easy to do that, but there are things, inexplicable things, in my life that I can't explain (and science can't either).
My sister read me a quote the other day, "A religious person saying 'I'll pray for you' is like an atheist saying, 'I'll think logically for you.'" I thought it was pretty funny.
As for your question "When someone is brought up in a society believing in a high power then where does reason come in?" I would reverse it to "When someone is brought up in a society believing in reason then where does a high power come in?" To that I would answer when you have doubts, when there are things you can't explain, when you have no control and need comfort.
I, as an idealist, would echo Jesse's sentiment that there is a gary spot, a middle ground between faith and logic, at least when it comes to forming the individual. As an atheist, I pride myself on reaching logical conclusions that make me feel smarter than religious people (which is most atheists' way of thinking, if not they're probably lying, queue Richard Dawkin's lecture). But there are also times when I'm irrational and even make faith-based claims. I have faith that Gophers will win a game, sometime. I gamble with lucky personal items in order to make bank. Such things are irrational and not based on fact, but as someone who is against "faith" in a religious context, I still find my way of thinking becoming pervaded by feelings, emotions, and fiction.
ReplyDeleteEric Best
This is getting interesting. I do not subscribe to a particular religion, nor do I consider myself an atheist. I wouldn't even go so far as to say that I consider myself "spiritual," but I do sometimes ascribe certain occurrences to an over-arching 'power.' The rational, logical Me places stock in the fact that the world is ordered by trillions of instances of chance but the superstitious/spiritual Me NEEDS to believe that some *thing* regulates the phenomena of the world such that everything occurs in a proportionate manner. In other words, something needs to enforce and uphold the chaos. I feel like this aligns with Descartes' philosophy that God must exist simply because of our need for an explanation that only "God" can provide.
ReplyDeleteThis being said, I don't believe in God. Where the hell does that leave me? God, this is confusing.
Like Jesse, my father and I talk about religion all the time and he as a Christian often supports himself with his personal experience and verses from the Bible. And some of them I just can not forget and would think it over and over. I myself believe that there can't be that much coincidence in this world, and around us. A lot of times we tend to think that we are lucky or just say "what a coincidence", but when you really think about it, really? There are just way too many things on Earth we can't explain or we just don't need to explain. Science is something that I am interested, though I am not good at, is also way for me to understand the world more and even be amazed by everything, in which it seems to me that they are all planned and linked to each other. There's a strong bond between everything.
ReplyDeleteNikki's 'There is no middle point' absolutely NAILS the bind Descartes creates for us. When she wrote that she did not think the cause could be Jesus or God, I thought: could be if we re-define God a little....'
ReplyDelete