On 3/7/07, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/7/07, Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>
> Tom Caylor wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with the Russell quote as it stands. Unendingness is not what
> > > gives meaning. The source of meaning is not "living forever" in time
> > > (contrary to the trans-humanists) but is timeless. However, the quote
> >
> > > makes a bad assumption when it talks about losing value. The real
> > > problem is how there can be any true objective value to love in the
> > > first place (other than the so-called "irrefutable" first person:
> > > "It's all about me").
> >
> > Why should there be? Values are relative to people. Love is our
> > word. We invented it to describe what we feel. Having some Platonic form
> > of LOVE out there is superfluous. You're just making up a requirement for
> > "the really real ding-an-sich" so that you can say God provides it.
> >
>
> You could replace "love" with "chocolate" and "God" with "the chocolate
> fairy". You can claim that while the reason people like chocolate can be
> explained in terms of chemistry, physiology, evolutionary biology etc., only
> the chocolate fairy can give ultimate meaning to the chocolate eating
> experience.
>
> Stathis Papaioannou
>
I hope that didn't come across as facetious, Tom. These are serious
questions and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss them with an
intelligent and scientifically well-informed theist.
Stathis
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Mar 07 2007 - 04:30:04 PST