Re: Strange Bedfellows, Atheism and Naturaistic Theism

Date: Sun Sep 14 2003 - 21:07:40 EDT

  • Next message: gordon brown: "Re: A modest proposal"

    >>>As an example of the first strategy, it seems to me that Daniel Dennett
    his recent book _Freedom Evolves_ opts for the first strategy by pushing a
    definition of freedom that doesn't, in my opinion, fit our common sense of
    the term. This might be considered a slight of hand move that seems to
    offer an answer to the anathema but it really doesn't.<<<

    I haven't seen this work but there is nothing new in this _Freedom Evolves_

    There is a great problem with the suggestion that freedom, per se, can
    evolve. This would effectively render universal justice ineffective and
    impotent. If for example, freedom is seen as varying from one age to the
    next, then what may have been deplorable in one epoch (as far as human
    morality is concerned) could be radically redefined in another era. This is
    not practical for obvious reasons.

    This idea is really a rehash of moral relativism.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 14 2003 - 21:08:08 EDT