Gardener
New Member
Beauty is something that burns the hand when you touch it.
Posts: 4 
Likes: 3
|
Post by Gardener on Dec 22, 2017 5:48:04 GMT
So, i was wondering, the concept of the ontological argument doesn't seem to fit inside the divine projection nor an achetype of a divine concept (mircea elliade), but i would say that a "definition" of what is this ontological argument (how it is, the "good", the "one") and how it manifests can be a projection of humam mind and by this the ontological argument comes to a crisis because it becomes a mere object of projection and an archetype of "god". Discuss? |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 22, 2017 5:56:50 GMT
How do you see it as the object and an archetype of a god?
|
|
Gardener
New Member
Beauty is something that burns the hand when you touch it.
Posts: 4
Likes: 3
|
Post by Gardener on Dec 22, 2017 6:02:18 GMT
in the moment u define god u are making an assumption, if u make an assumption u are projecting some things and not others, when the neoplatonist talk about the good, the one, the love they are limiting god to their point of view in goodness. They say that evil comes from the desnaturation of the thing, they mix the judgment of fact and the judgment of value, the mix fact with opinion. when u take an ideia and play with it as a toy u make it a projection, if u define how this toy is it is an archetype, for example Ares from the greeks,
|
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Dec 22, 2017 7:37:11 GMT
I disagree. Gardener, you are a Plato-ist who fails to recognize the assumptions that Plato made. Plato is basically the religious founder of the religion of western Atheism. The primary article of faith of this religion is that truth is absolute, and these absolute truths exist independently of the mind. Yet these truths are much like gods in the sense that their existence cannot be proven. One only connects to these truths using deductive reason which acts much like the Holy Spirit in Christianity. So finding these truths is a religious experience for Atheists.
Any belief system must begin with axioms, and these axioms one must take on "faith". Only once one has axioms can one begin to reason about the world. Religions are just more honest about this than atheists and philosophers are. Religions recognize their own axioms rather than trying to hide them.
|
|
mitchell
New Member
Posts: 28
Likes: 20
Country: USA
Region: Ohio
Politics: Left
Religion: None
Relationship Status: Married
Age: 71
|
Post by mitchell on Dec 22, 2017 22:40:54 GMT
So, i was wondering, the concept of the ontological argument doesn't seem to fit inside the divine projection nor an achetype of a divine concept (mircea elliade), but i would say that a "definition" of what is this ontological argument (how it is, the "good", the "one") and how it manifests can be a projection of humam mind and by this the ontological argument comes to a crisis because it becomes a mere object of projection and an archetype of "god". Discuss? Actually, I do not understand this post. |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2017 6:41:39 GMT
Once u absorb the oncological argument. U have to rest with the divinity fact..there isn't much more to it
|
|
mitchell
New Member
Posts: 28
Likes: 20
Country: USA
Region: Ohio
Politics: Left
Religion: None
Relationship Status: Married
Age: 71
|
Post by mitchell on Dec 23, 2017 17:37:36 GMT
1. The Ontological Argument is a type of argument, not just a single argument, of which there are several different instances. To which are you referring
2. The original post is way too Jungian for my taste, and seems to be more speculative psychology than philosophy.
|
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2017 18:14:18 GMT
Yup
|
|
