Musing on Jesus and Schopenhauer and Buddha and the very different orientations that arise between the first and the other two. One is hope and the is a profound despair.
Continue Reading Add comment November 17th, 2008
A fairly brief condensation of Kant’s thinking from the Critique of Pure Reason through his Religion Within The Bounds Of Reason Alone. I write on this theme now and then in my effort to find a concise presentation.
Continue Reading Add comment November 17th, 2008
My recommendation (as a protestant) to the Roman Catholic Church
Continue Reading Add comment November 16th, 2008
The gays in California should not have taken part in opposing the anti-gay amendment.
Continue Reading Add comment November 16th, 2008
How the Mormons might find it advantageous for the gays of California to be deprived of their rights to marry whom they choose. How Mormonism is potentially more disturbing than Islam. What Christians ought to do regarding the gays.
Continue Reading Add comment November 16th, 2008
How it is that the atheist must admit that he is immoral, and unable to commit a moral act (unless it is clothed in self interest, which of course removes the morality entirely).
Continue Reading Add comment November 16th, 2008
Looking at the ramification of the withdrawing of existing rights from a select group of the population, here the loss of the right to marry among gays in California. Can we now also reinstitute slavery or make chattel of women again?
Continue Reading Add comment November 16th, 2008
Reflecting on the character of Zachaeus and his transformation and the transformation of Paul.
Continue Reading Add comment November 16th, 2008
Christian justification for forced or voluntary abortion in an early term. Thinking of alternatives and finding an ideal one in the homosexual orientation or life-style.
Continue Reading Add comment November 10th, 2008
Kant maintains that there is a natural conflict, and on-going conflict, a rational conflict going on in the rationality of man. It has to do with this: while the moral law commands us to make a move without consideration of the effects (simply because it is the moral law), our rationality insists upon a purpose to all actions, including the moral action. Now in order to reconcile this conflict we conceive of the Highest Good which is possible for humans and that would be moral perfection and commensurate happiness. We say that it is to this goal that the moral law is directed, and in this way we eliminate the conflict for now happiness and moral perfection are united. This then is the morally necessary purpose of the moral law. Now it so happens that for humans this means that a longer life and God are necessary to, respectively, provide the assumed moral perfection implicit in the moral act, and to force the laws of nature to reward the morally deserving.
So by means of the Highest Good Kant provides a aim and purpose to the moral act, and as a result of this he calls forth God and eternal life.
Now in our present day it is fashionable to deny the existence of God and eternal life. Let’s see what happens when that is done. Without God and eternal life there is no Highest Good, and without the Highest Good there is no aim and purpose to the moral law. And to engage in an action which has no aim and purpose is to act irrationally. And so to engage in a moral act would be irrational.* Now let’s consider the actions of a rational man who realizes that the moral law is aimless and without purpose.
[* This is not to deny that such a person might engage in what would be called a moral act, but do so out of feelings of affection or compassion, both to be praised, but not lauded as is the moral law to be hailed.]
If a rational person (under the atheist premise) felt put upon by the feelings of a regret when he or she violates the moral law, then that person would be advised to seek medical help of some sort. The decision would be based on the expected torments and mental stresses from immoral acts verses the happiness which might ensue from those same acts. Unless the treatment were inexpensive, then we could easily come up with something akin to the Orchs of Tolkien’s Ring on a mass level. So a rational person would seek to be rid of the moral qualms entirely and be free to act without those constraints, even though, for immoral purposes, the person might announce quite the opposite in public. He would be well advised to do so, in fact, in order to keep others off balance and not realizing what is going on, namely that they are now prey.*
[* A graphic example of an immoral person (bereft of the moral feelings) facing the choice of an immoral act or a moral act. It would be like (this, in a different context from The New Yorker) a waiter asks if you want the fish tonight or your own hand charcoal grilled and served with a side of your eye balls. You would have to think that the waiter was joking, just as the immoral person would feel if asked if he wanted to do a moral act, or to make some money. It would be that the question wouldn’t make any sense. Again, a la Orch. If the waiter is not joking then no rational person would ask further as to how the fish is prepared.]
So then according to Kant the theoretical atheist becomes a practical believer in God (there must be a God) or else he must renounce morality or else he must renounce rationality. Without God the moral law is pointless, and cannot be honored by a rational person, by a person professing rationality.
Note. Even scientists subscribe to personal freedom because of the impact that the moral law makes upon them individually, for the moral law can be meaningful only to a being who is truly free to make the moral choice that the Orchs can no longer even understand. And they are able to justify this free will to each other by virtue of the fact that while the addition of the freedom factor does nothing for the scientific equations, it is also not unreasonable, for you can no more prove the lack of freedom than you can prove that there are no fairies.* [I discussed this earlier here.] So a scientist can (and indeed is even morally mandated to) maintain a belief in God, so long as he does not try to insert it into the predictive equations.
[* While it is true that there is no reason to assume the existence of fairies, there is a reason to assume the existence of God, namely the dictates of the moral law to do that which promotes morality.]
Add comment November 10th, 2008