Originally posted by wolfgang59
Incredible as it may seem the following passage is taken from the Oxford
University website. How can one of the world's most prestigious universities
spout this nonsense?
[i]Theology and Religion are subjects vital to understanding what it means
to be human – in the past and in today’s world. Theology is the study of
God and the questions raised ...[text shortened]... ]
They are touting that the study of god(s) can improve your critical thinking!!!
No, Theology and Religion do offer good trainings in thinking critically, logically and with empathy; for example, check out the following four negations:
First negation: If the observer universe was born by a so called creator out of the combination of specific causes and conditions and it exists thanks to that combination, the universe could not be born solely thanks to that combination alone dew to the fact that the combination would never arise without the desire of the creator. However the belief “the specific cause and conditions that they formed the combination required for the creation of the observer universe are brought up by a creator” is not tenable due to the fact that the desire and the desirous one cannot be established neither as co-existent nor as non co-existent.
Second negation: If the observer universe was born by a creator who set up the necessary for its birth cause and conditions and it was not born solely from a specific combination of causes and conditions unrelated to the desire of the so called creator, we should assume that the universe does not exist in a combination unrelated to the desire of the creator. However this is not tenable because the observer universe exists in a given combination unrelated to the desire of the so called creator, dew to the fact that the existence of the so called creator of the given combination is neither proven nor necessary for the rising of the combination.
Third negation: If the observer universe was not existent solely because of a given combination of causes and conditions unrelated to the desire of a so called creator, it would not be apprehendable in that given combination alone. However, since the universe is indeed well apprehendable in that combination alone due to solid scientific facts and evidence, the necessity of a creator who supposedly brought up the rising of that combination is dismissed.
Fourth negation: If the observer universe was created by the so called creator after the rising of the combination from which it was born, we should be forced to assume that the combination and the observer universe are neither simultaneous nor contained in the same spacetime continuum, because in this case the combination would be a part of the observer universe. And, if the observer universe was born by a creator prior to the combination, we should accept that the universe was uncaused by the combination and caused by the desire of the creator alone because the combination itself would be a part of the universe. Therefore, we would be forced to accept that the universe has neither causes nor conditions other than the desire of the so called creator, however both of these beliefs are not tenable.
These four negations force us to accept that there is no universe that has been created by a so called creator either by means of a combination of his/ her choice or by means of her/ his desire alone. However, since the universe is indeed existent and apprehendable solely in a given combination, it was born solely out of a specific combination of causes and conditions unrelated to the so called creator. Hard to come to this conclusion if you don’t have to cope with Theology and Religion