1. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    09 Nov '06 23:102 edits
    Analyze this article from the Catholic propaganda periodical CRISIS Magazine:
    Truth And Apologetics
    http://www.crisismagazine.com/julaug2006/wagner.htm

    If you have extra time, comment on this one:
    Godless Morality? Why Judeo-Christianity Is Necessary For Human Rights
    http://www.crisismagazine.com/julaug2006/feature2.htm

    They are both right up your alley.
  2. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    10 Nov '06 01:29
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Analyze this article from the Catholic propaganda periodical CRISIS Magazine:
    [b]Truth And Apologetics

    http://www.crisismagazine.com/julaug2006/wagner.htm

    If you have extra time, comment on this one:
    Godless Morality? Why Judeo-Christianity Is Necessary For Human Rights
    http://www.crisismagazine.com/julaug2006/feature2.htm

    They are both right up your alley.[/b]
    I'll get right on it.
  3. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    10 Nov '06 02:09
    O.K., Herr Doctor, what would you like to know?
  4. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    10 Nov '06 02:303 edits
    Originally posted by bbarr
    O.K., Herr Doctor, what would you like to know?
    First, are Wagner's characterizations of the four theories of truth factually accurate, or does he mischaracterize them?

    Additionally, is his analysis of the four theories correct or flawed? In particular, ought we reject subjectivisim and deflationary theory out of hand as he suggests?

    In your professional opinion as an epistemologist, does Wagner know what the hell he is talking about? Would you allow him to guest lecture your classes?
  5. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    10 Nov '06 02:462 edits
    As for the second article, are Fesser's and Benedict's claims correct?

    The state of things in contemporary secular moral theorizing does not appear to provide much ground for optimism. Benedict XVI, in a speech given just prior to his recent election, warned that “we are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one's own ego and one's own desires.”


    In your professional opinion as an ethical and metaethical theorist, do either of them know what they hell they are talking about?
  6. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    10 Nov '06 07:09
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    As for the second article, are Fesser's and Benedict's claims correct?

    [quote]The state of things in contemporary secular moral theorizing does not appear to provide much ground for optimism. Benedict XVI, in a speech given just prior to his recent election, warned that “we are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize an ...[text shortened]... ical and metaethical theorist, do either of them know what they hell they are talking about?
    A dictatorship of relativism? What kind of double-speak is that?
  7. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    10 Nov '06 07:11
    Originally posted by rwingett
    A dictatorship of relativism? What kind of double-speak is that?
    It's being let loose in a shopping mall of infinite dimension with an infinite variety of goods with infinite $ in your hand.
  8. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36068
    10 Nov '06 10:39
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    In your professional opinion as an epistemologist, does Wagner know what the hell he is talking about? Would you allow him to guest lecture your classes?
    Would one allow Bbarr to guest lecture one's classes?
  9. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36068
    10 Nov '06 10:401 edit
    Originally posted by rwingett
    A dictatorship of relativism? What kind of double-speak is that?
    "Be a relativist, or else."

    Simply put.

    EDIT: Or "Accept a relativist society, or else."
  10. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    10 Nov '06 14:52
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    "Be a relativist, or else."

    Simply put.

    EDIT: Or "Accept a relativist society, or else."
    That's like saying Democracy is a dictatorship because everyone is forced to be free.
  11. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    10 Nov '06 17:21
    Originally posted by rwingett
    That's like saying Democracy is a dictatorship because everyone is forced to be free.
    Do you know about Arrow's impossibility theorem?
  12. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36068
    10 Nov '06 17:35
    Originally posted by rwingett
    That's like saying Democracy is a dictatorship because everyone is forced to be free.
    Not at all. It would be like saying that a democracy where everyone is forced to vote for just one candidate is a dictatorship.
  13. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    10 Nov '06 17:43
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    Not at all. It would be like saying that a democracy where everyone is forced to vote for just one candidate is a dictatorship.
    Or like saying that a God who forces everyone to choose between worshipping him and suffering eternal torment is a benevolent one.
  14. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36068
    10 Nov '06 17:521 edit
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Or like saying that a God who forces everyone to choose between worshipping him and suffering eternal torment is a benevolent one.
    No. That would be like saying that someone is malevolent for pointing out that if you don't drink [water], you get thirsty.

    EDIT: If you choose to never drink [water], you will always be thirsty.
  15. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    10 Nov '06 17:56
    Let's count the false analogies!

    HA HA

    jk
Back to Top