This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Derdekeas's Profile

Derdekeas's Avatar Joined almost 3 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by Derdekeas

More Discussions by Derdekeas

Latest Comments by Derdekeas

Go to: Louisiana lunacy: tens of millions to be spent on faith-based education

Derdekeas's Avatar Jump to comment 6 by Derdekeas

"We are called to be salt and light and to be planting the seeds of the gospel."

Maybe if they took a real biology class they'd at least learn that "salt" is NOT good for planting!

Sat, 09 Jun 2012 19:14:18 UTC | #946607

Go to: Happy, wise, or virtuous?

Derdekeas's Avatar Jump to comment 4 by Derdekeas

Well, Plato wasn't the only one to suggest such a link. Buddhism has some parallels, i.e. think your way out of having attachments and avoid suffering. Seneca the Roman philosopher, also suggested that the wise can avoid frustration, anger and unhappiness by properly assessing the world around them and their own ability to effect it. He suggested that much of our anger comes from incorrectly anticipating that things will go our way or overestimating the control we have over others and our environment.

Keep in mind, in all of these paradigms, "wise" is not to be equated with "smart". We all probably know or at least have heard of brilliant people that have no social skills. Wisdom is a certain kind of intelligence. It is the ability to recognize certain facts about the world and adjust ourselves to them. This makes it almost a tautology, where wisdom is the ability to recognize and avoid the source, or sources of suffering. So, to suffer is to not be wise. Of course this does not preclude the possibility that the unwise could be happy. Luck will always play its role. However, it is interesting to note that it is not uncommon for the very wealthy, even lottery winners to be unhappy. There does seem to be a knack to achieving happiness that is not correlated to wealth or station.

What makes these philosophers interesting is just what it is that they think is necessary for one to be happy, what they have identified as the source of misery and what we can do to achieve the good life. If it is true, that happiness is not wholly dependent on external features, and if we do have control over the relevant internal features, then it is true that the wise can reason themselves to happiness.

Fri, 08 Jul 2011 05:20:48 UTC | #847559

Go to: W.L. Craig claims L. Krauss thinks child rape "may be morally acceptable".

Derdekeas's Avatar Jump to comment 72 by Derdekeas

Isn't Craig just making a very elementary logic mistake? I mean Krauss attacked the premise not the conclusion. The premise can be wrong and the conclusion still true.

Common sense morality = Child rape is wrong If CSM is false it doesn't mean that it is not the case that child rape is wrong.

Similarly Craig seems to think that because CSM yields a negative judgment in child rape and that is clearly correct then CSM must be right too. Affirm the consequent much, Craig?

I get that Craig is bad at science, but shouldn't a theologian at least have a grasp of formal logic? I know a philosopher should, I sure hope he doesn't purport to be one of those!

Sat, 28 May 2011 22:58:56 UTC | #631896

More Comments by Derdekeas