Response to Jim__ (Original post)
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 05:24 PM
digonswine (1,483 posts)
2. This is simply shifty language-

In these lectures I argue that these claims are not linguistic contradictions, as they are often taken to be, but fundamental insights into what a religion really is.
Religionists see the beauty of god in all creation.
Physicists will see it as a lovely equation.
We cannot square these two things.
I see the beauty of nature, but this is not a religion.
A religion starts with supposed truth and looks for evidence.
"How, then, can we defend a religious attitude if we cannot rely on a god? In the first lecture I offer a godless argument that moral and ethical values are objectively real: They do not depend on god, but neither are they just subjective or relative to cultures. They are objective and universal. In the second lecture I concentrate on Einstein’s own religion: his bewitchment by the universe".
I think they are subjective and relative to cultures. Lots of pretty talk.
|
Reply to this post
Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread
Replies to this discussion thread
Edit History
Please
login to view edit histories.