Thricegreat's Webpage
387,609 views
88 followers
7,273 updates
0 tips
2 likes
>daliwali So religion is not really arguable. It is showable. So if you don't see what I wrote I can't explain it. With the exact same reason that the beauty of Beethoven's symphonies can't be explained for people who can't see.
2 likes
>daliwali That's an interesting way the debate goes on. I think Noumena can't be said so that what Thomas Aquinas did in Summa Theologica was not actual proofs. But it is showable via things like art or practice. Well this is basically Wittgenstein's Tractatus. Religion is not noumena itself, but it shows some noumena.
2 likes
>daliwali I agree that Christianity is not special and it has Prisca Theologia only partially. But it HAS Prisca Theologia too similar to other religions.
2 likes
>daliwali I guess you just don't actually believe there are things before the phenomenal world. Talking about popularity doesn't make any sense because what makes every religion religion is its consideration of things that have existed since before the cosmos. Humans exist AFTER the cosmos, although some religions say that's because of the fall.
2 likes
>letslearntogether Your explanation about creatio ex nihilo sounds like Parmenides lol.
1 like
letslearntogether
3 months ago
Lol! Not Anaximander or Anaxagoras?...Reading the conversation between you and daliwali is quite enjoyable. I generally agree that "noumena" are irreducible in expression (e.g.: GΓΆdel's incompleteness theorems), but can be experienced (i.e.: that's what "gnosis" is). These "archetypal forms" are the foundation of the "Prisca Theologia"/"Primordial Tradition"/"Perennial Philosophy"/etc.
letslearntogether
3 months ago
In other words, they are what all individual expressions hold in common and reasoning can point to them. One of the clearest descriptions of how humans connect to this process that I've seen is from Miriam Joseph's Trivium. I would type it out here, but the quote won't fit, so I'll post it with some extra notes on its own temporary webpage: https://letslearntogether.neocities.org/bookclub/quote01
>daliwali Religion is not a means. That's literally an atheistic and materialistic worldview. Although each religion has its defects, there is definitely sacredness in it as god's energy. I think what we should do is pursuing Prisca Theologia.
1 like
daliwali
3 months ago
i think both are true, religion is a means to an end (power, influence, control) adopted by states. without adoption as state religion by romans, christianity would have died as an obscure cult. there may or may not be a kernel of truth, but most followers will never know.
1 like
>daliwali In Christianity, I think the fact that Jesus incarnated as a human automatically leads to a virtue ethics. If Jesus is god and just, his life was just so that he becomes a concept similar to Junzi in Confucianism. The ethical man.
1 like
>daliwali What I read recently were his short stories like "Two Old Men"... And NOPE. Becoming a Christ is not arbitrary at all and deification is a tradition since ancient times, even before Christianity. Dividing god and nature strictly is a western European nonsense, especially protestant. I just have realized that if Jesus was who god incarnated, deification should mean becoming Christ.
2 likes
daliwali
3 months ago
all of the holy men are but traditions. you can follow Christ if it helps you sleep at night... but few have the courage to stand alone, to not be a follower.
1 like
![[corbiss] desktop avatar](/site_screenshots/11/86/corbiss/index.html.50x50.webp)
why does existence of a noumenal world hinge on belief? i believe that noumena exist but is also not knowable... the human mind does not deal with that ambiguity and uncertainty well.