Date: 2009-01-08 03:05 pm (UTC)
No, I wasn't advancing C.S. Lewis's argument. I don't rate him very highly as a metaphysician.

As for the issues about axioms and experience, you're not by chance making a Kantian argument that philosophy cannot have axioms, are you? If so, we may have been at cross-purposes and I may have to go away and re-read the Critique of Pure Reason, in which case you may be waiting some time for your answer ;-) If not, I don't think I can add anything to [livejournal.com profile] djm4's responses on axioms and the necessity of basing them on experience in a non-Kantian sense (evidence being a specialised form of experience).

On the issues that aren't directly about axioms, and skipping back several comments:

The mental gymnastics I had to do to keep ignoring my perception of the divine were driving me insane.

Now that's something that I think we could usefully discuss - though I think the phrase "account for" would be fairer than "ignore". We know that not all sensation is externally generated - if we hear a ringing sound, is a bell ringing, or do I have tinitus?


No, I really do mean "ignore". I'm aware that there are alternative explanations for what I experience, but that awareness isn't enough to keep me functional. The darn things keep demanding a response.

I don't think of myself as an expert in epistemology, and I'm happy to be shot down on this one if I learn from the experience. Any pointers you can give would be gratefully received, especially if they don't involve spending any money...

Tricky. My supervisor was Renford Bambrough, whose books are now quite difficult to get hold of, and IIRC the only one I own doesn't address this issue. He was one of those supervisors who largely recommend reading they disagree with and leave you to try and figure out the "right" position for yourself, so there isn't any other obvious reading that immediately comes to mind. Without necessarily agreeing with them, he did think quite highly of Elizabeth Anscombe, G.E.Smith and of course Wittgenstein (his specialist subject), so looking for some of their books on Google Books might be an option, but I don't recall enough detail to direct you to something immediately relevant to this conversation.

I should have stuck with "prosaic"

I'm not sure that would have helped. My attitude to God is quite similar to Granny Weatherwax's - "it would be like believing in the postman" - except I don't quite hold with her further thoughts on not giving them ideas above their station.

If I say "better not spill this tea, it'll stain the carpet", practically everyone will feel they understand what I mean, and be able to follow and verify my chain of reasoning trivially.

Well, yes, but that apparent understanding can often disguises serious disconnects that the participants either are not aware of, or do not find necessary to resolve for the purposes of the conversation. If you want to talk about metaphysical questions like whether or not God exists, or even whether the tea exists (on which I suspect we also would not entirely agree), that approach doesn't work.
(will be screened)
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

Profile

ciphergoth: (Default)
Paul Crowley

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   1234
5678 91011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 3rd, 2025 01:01 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios