thedoc wrote:Tool bias can work both ways,
Years ago I worked with another person who claimed that they would not have a Hammer in their tool box. When questioned why, they stated that a hammer was an "Implement of destruction". Another question came up, "What if you wanted to hang a picture on the wall and needed to drive in a nail?", to which they said they would drive it in with their clog. This person condoned the act of hammering a nail but condemned the proper tool for the job, Just a bit of a contradiction, in my mind.
I believe I see what you were getting at, and that is that some people will use the same form of argument or reasoning to justify many different beliefs, just as some will use the same form of argument to condemn many beliefs or ideas. In the realm of ideas and beliefs, arguments are the tools used to support or deny the concept in question.
You, Doc, are the oldest surviving participant in this very short discussion from several years ago about the classic proofs of God.
Rick the Editor is of course still around naturally, although his imprint is on many things from the magazine. He still welcomes people at least.
One neophyte unschooled in Philosophy had asked what sense do these arguments make since they have seemed to be inconclusive -- at least to him -- for all time or at least since the issue had first come up with Augustine. That plebe is gone now from the website however.
I think the plebe was in error with his basic assumption that because an issue has seemed to be unresolved at least to him for several centuries now that it bears no merit any longer.
That strikes me as foolishness since an unresolved issue is still a current issue.
The classic proofs of God are still relevant because they still deal with the relevant issues of paradoxes of existence.
When did existence begin in the Universe? Well, Hubble the space telescope give us data that suggest (data are plural) that it began 15 billion years ago. So that much is settled. At some finite point in time in the past existence began.
It like all other Empirical Scientific discoveries only leads to new questions from there however.
How did existence begin? Presumably from some kind of Big Bang -- this is the common modern notion.
What caused it? We still don't know.
Did the First Cause create itself? Or was It created by Someone Or Something else? Well we know that before 15 billion years ago nothing that we can see with our eyes or our telescopes existed. So now we are back in Metaphysics and the invisible unseen world -- IF that truly exists.
These issues are unresolved and persistent, and as such are still current issues.
Ignoring issues because they are unresolved is idiotic if not satanic.
Imagine being afraid to use a tool because it's an "implement" of anything...now, that's superstition!