arfink Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 OK, so this seems like a perfect place to have this conversation. I have been thinking about things (yes, dangerous I know!) and in metaphysics we have these ideas of realism and unrealism. All of the classical proofs of theism rely upon metaphysical realism. Now, if we ignore the fact that unrealism in metaphysics is debateably incapable of crossing the mind-reality gap, is it possible to make a proof of God's existence based on a metaphysical system of unrealism? I highly suspect it is truly impossible to do. Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted June 23, 2013 Author Share Posted June 23, 2013 OK, I should preface this by saying, I believe that if you accept metaphysical realism, you might as well accept theism, since metaphysical realism requires you to accept things like the external reality and discoverability of truths like mathematics, so God is intrinsically not logically impossible, and thus necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not The Philosopher Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 I think that if you were still a moral realist, you could potentially get from the moral law to God. Your conception of God might not be kosher, though. Kant is a good example of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted June 29, 2013 Author Share Posted June 29, 2013 I think that if you were still a moral realist, you could potentially get from the moral law to God. Your conception of God might not be kosher, though. Kant is a good example of this. One thing I never could understand about that position is, how can you believe in moral realism without believing in all the rest of realism as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annie12 Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 I would think you could start by trying to prove a simple proof of unrealism. You Probably are right but I'm not completely sure. When trying to prove God's existence to unbelievers, you have to come from their point of view (that he doesn't exist) in order to prove to them that God does indeed exist. So that you have to start with a purely mental concept and move to proving it as a real thing. I don't know if this make any sense... :blush: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not The Philosopher Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 One thing I never could understand about that position is, how can you believe in moral realism without believing in all the rest of realism as well? I agree. At the very least, you have to bend things out of shape in order to bake your cake and eat it too (again, like Kant). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted June 30, 2013 Author Share Posted June 30, 2013 The more I think about Kant's position the more I realize why his writing never made sense to me before. :hehe: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now