The Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2026 3:47 pm

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2026 3:36 pm HOW (by what evidence) do you argue "this book is the right book and that book the wrong book"?

Oh, that's very easy. Read them.

The symmetry to which I was referring is that having read them, you, a Christian decide the the New Testament is the "right book" (obviously so)
And he by having read them, decides al Quran is the "right book" (obviously so)
And she having read then, decides the Bhagavad Gita is the "right book" (obviously so)

When I read them it is not with any hope to be able to determine which (if any) are TRUE. I read them to try to understand "this is what a Christian believes, this is what a Muslim believes, this is what a Hindu believes, etc.

I observe, human societies all seem to have religion/belief in the supernatural. It is possible that ONE of these belief systems is true (but maybe none of them) but this is not what I consider important. I'd rather look at these in the other sense, since most are not TRUE, what purpose do they serve, how do they help us be better humans, help us understand the human condition.

Ah, but you don't believe in evolution, the fact that we do not observe societies with no religious beliefs/beliefs abut the supernatural means something important about being human << irrespective of the TRUTH of these religious/supernatural beliefs >>

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 1:04 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2026 3:47 pm

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2026 3:36 pm HOW (by what evidence) do you argue "this book is the right book and that book the wrong book"?

Oh, that's very easy. Read them.

The symmetry to which I was referring is that having read them, you, a Christian decide the the New Testament is the "right book" (obviously so)
And he by having read them, decides al Quran is the "right book" (obviously so)
And she having read then, decides the Bhagavad Gita is the "right book" (obviously so)

The only way somebody could think that is by having read only one book. Maybe they should read more.

When I read them it is not with any hope to be able to determine which (if any) are TRUE.

Now, why would that be? Unless you decided, before you even investigated, that you weren't going to allow any of them to challenge you...

since most are not TRUE, what purpose do they serve, how do they help us be better humans, help us understand the human condition.

That's a way of viewing them. And it has some merits. But it also has a big pitfall; because that would mean that, prior to any investigation at all, you'd already decided they would be "serving a purpose" and "helping us be better humans" and "helping us understand the human condition"...all things one can expect from fictional literature, but not the sort of thing one looks for from non-fiction. So you'd decided to disbelieve them all, even before you began.

Ah, but you don't believe in evolution, the fact that we do not observe societies with no religious beliefs/beliefs abut the supernatural means something important about being human << irrespective of the TRUTH of these religious/supernatural beliefs >>

Oh? So now you not only believe in physical evolution, but in moral and spiritual evolution as well? But it must be obvious to you that there is no promise of the latter two in the former, correct? The impartial process of nature do not vouchsafe any species in advance that as time passes it will be made more moral or more spiritual, does it?

So you've got your own whole metanarrative already embedded so deeply in your psyche that you're not even conscious it's there. Yet it causes you to pre-determine, without any evidence at all, that all other religions are fictive, and that we are all evolving toward higher states of being, even in the moral and spiritual realms.

That's quite a faith you have there. Do you have any grounds for it?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 1:29 am
That's quite a faith you have there. Do you have any grounds for it?

Faith without facts is for fools.

To be a God, one must breach moral, perfection.

Job 2.3 has Yahweh saying he is imperfect when he says that Satan moved him to do evil without a just cause.

That is Yahweh admitting that he is a sinner.

We care all created in the image of a sinner, says the Bible.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 1:29 am

Ah, but you don't believe in evolution, the fact that we do not observe societies with no religious beliefs/beliefs abut the supernatural means something important about being human << irrespective of the TRUTH of these religious/supernatural beliefs >>

Oh? So now you not only believe in physical evolution, but in moral and spiritual evolution as well? But it must be obvious to you that there is no promise of the latter two in the former, correct? The impartial process of nature do not vouchsafe any species in advance that as time passes it will be made more moral or more spiritual, does it?

EVOLUTION does not apply just to its expression in Biology (change of species).

If it did, the "bead experiment" would not work. It does not apply to individual biological organisms, it applies to SPECIES. Not that "species" is not a biological entity.

Human cultures/societies are not humans. They are systems whose components are humans. They are entities subject to the rules of "evolution". In competition with other societies/cultures, if they are "fitter" (have some net survival advantage) they will proliferate. The ones that are less 'fit" will vanish from the population of cultures/societies.

If I observe something in common (present) in all cultures/societies) then I conclude one of the factors making a society "fitter". If it is a sort of thing that is in common (but differing in detail) then I conclude is the "sort of thing" and not the detail that matters.

So yes, I am holding that religious/spiritual beliefs are part of being human just as I believe morality is part of being human.

Careful here --- do not raise the matter of "secularists" here. First of all, we observe no secular SOCIETIES and secondly, religious/spiritual beliefs is broader than what you consider religious/spiritual . For example, consider the Szenes poem: (translator unknown)

There are stars
whose light reaches the earth only after they themselves have disintegrated
and are no more.

And there are people
whose scintillating memory lights the world after they have passed from it.

These lights –
which shine in the darkest night – are those which illumine for us the path.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 7:13 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 1:29 am

Ah, but you don't believe in evolution, the fact that we do not observe societies with no religious beliefs/beliefs abut the supernatural means something important about being human << irrespective of the TRUTH of these religious/supernatural beliefs >>

Oh? So now you not only believe in physical evolution, but in moral and spiritual evolution as well? But it must be obvious to you that there is no promise of the latter two in the former, correct? The impartial process of nature do not vouchsafe any species in advance that as time passes it will be made more moral or more spiritual, does it?

EVOLUTION does not apply just to its expression in Biology (change of species).

Oh? So your supposition is that the human race is also "evolving" in these other areas?

Given the last century of human history, can you establish that we are now better morally and spiritually than, say, in previous centuries?

Human cultures/societies are not humans. They are systems whose components are humans. They are entities subject to the rules of "evolution". In competition with other societies/cultures, if they are "fitter" (have some net survival advantage) they will proliferate. The ones that are less 'fit" will vanish from the population of cultures/societies.

Interesting. Islam thinks the same thing.

Careful here --- do not raise the matter of "secularists" here. First of all, we observe no secular SOCIETIES

Actually, we do. All Marxist societies profess to be entirely "secular." Remember? They certainly work hard to extinguish anybody who's not...along with a goodly number of those who are.

Fun fact.

Both Christianity and Islam currently fund militias in the U.S. and elsewhere.

Both are Fascist regimes.

People forget how the Vatican Bank and the Church helped Hitler in his efforts even to running concentration camps.

All for a God who puts the needs of the few above the needs of the many.

Sigh.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 10:36 pm

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2026 7:13 pm
Careful here --- do not raise the matter of "secularists" here. First of all, we observe no secular SOCIETIES

You might want to look up France and Laisite.

Note the secularist legislation in northern E.U. of late in response to mostly Muslim excesses.