Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 18, 2022 8:20:33 GMT
Usually many thinkers and others wished to think that either the universe was perfect, or it would be possible to make it that.
But what if the universe isn't perfect, and it's impossible to make it be like that?
I think that Christianity has already answered this question saying that we have to be good here, to get the best there.
I think that Judaism has already answered this question saying that to be saved one must be a Jew and follow the orders.
I think that Islam has already answered this question proposing that to be saved one must follow the rules of Muhammed.
There were some other schools in philosophy and other branches, but most of them never gave anything closer to religions. I think that even for now the religion lasts to be one of the most completed and better answers to this question.
What philosophy can do here? Historically most of philosophers were about to find the best or the perfect world. They never stopped in guessing about non-perfect worlds. They usually continued guessing about only logically perfect, etc worlds.
I guess this is one of the reason why any religion is more popular, than any philosophy. There is no way to believe in such a philosophy. Philosphy isn't a saviour.
However, there are not only classic logics, there are non-classic logics, and there are logics that suppose imperfectness. If philosophers would use such logics to construct the perfect existence within imperfect worlds they would rather hope to have some more real answers.
By the way, Hegel was a German philosopher who saw this problem from this point of view. He knew that Philosophy couldn't win Religion in competetion until Philosophy could find some good answers, not only critique (to critique is not give the answer). And he tried to make his philosophy be as completed as religions, but I think he had failed at the start - there is no religion that can be based on mind only. That is why he's project was doomed, before the realization.
But what if the universe isn't perfect, and it's impossible to make it be like that?
I think that Christianity has already answered this question saying that we have to be good here, to get the best there.
I think that Judaism has already answered this question saying that to be saved one must be a Jew and follow the orders.
I think that Islam has already answered this question proposing that to be saved one must follow the rules of Muhammed.
There were some other schools in philosophy and other branches, but most of them never gave anything closer to religions. I think that even for now the religion lasts to be one of the most completed and better answers to this question.
What philosophy can do here? Historically most of philosophers were about to find the best or the perfect world. They never stopped in guessing about non-perfect worlds. They usually continued guessing about only logically perfect, etc worlds.
I guess this is one of the reason why any religion is more popular, than any philosophy. There is no way to believe in such a philosophy. Philosphy isn't a saviour.
However, there are not only classic logics, there are non-classic logics, and there are logics that suppose imperfectness. If philosophers would use such logics to construct the perfect existence within imperfect worlds they would rather hope to have some more real answers.
By the way, Hegel was a German philosopher who saw this problem from this point of view. He knew that Philosophy couldn't win Religion in competetion until Philosophy could find some good answers, not only critique (to critique is not give the answer). And he tried to make his philosophy be as completed as religions, but I think he had failed at the start - there is no religion that can be based on mind only. That is why he's project was doomed, before the realization.