Finitude. Let’s discuss it

[po18guy]

Amen! Theology is OK, but philosophy gives me a headache.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

And then there’s Theosophy and I don’t even know what that is. I’m just a bear.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

This, as a whole, can be pretty clearly denounced as a heresy by simply saying “God existed before man.” This truth must have existed outside of man’s perception as man did not even exist yet.

Is this the heresy rebuttal ( for want of the correct words ) is
God existed before man…
And explains why the philosophy definition is of concern to Catholics

I have not studied philosophy.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

Related: anger is an emotion that is morally neutral, yet intended to be used positively in opposition to evil.

Using anger positively in opposition to evil is a new one too. Can you explain more

 

[po18guy]

po18guy:

Related: anger is a (passion) that is morally neutral, yet intended to be used positively in opposition to evil.

Using anger positively in opposition to evil is a new one too. Can you explain more

Was moved to look this up some years back in CAF. My bad calling it an “emotion” when it is more properly a “passion.” From the catechism:

1765 There are many passions. The most fundamental passion is love, aroused by the attraction of the good. Love causes a desire for the absent good and the hope of obtaining it; this movement finds completion in the pleasure and joy of the good possessed. The apprehension of evil causes hatred, aversion, and fear of the impending evil; this movement ends in sadness at some present evil, or in the anger that resists it.

1766 "To love is to will the good of another."41 All other affections have their source in this first movement of the human heart toward the good. Only the good can be loved.42 Passions "are evil if love is evil and good if it is good."43

II. PASSIONS AND MORAL LIFE

1767
In themselves passions are neither good nor evil. They are morally
qualified only to the extent that they effectively engage reason and
will. Passions are said to be voluntary, "either because they are
commanded by the will or because the will does not place obstacles in
their way."44 It belongs to the perfection of the moral or human good that the passions be governed by reason.45

1768
Strong feelings are not decisive for the morality or the holiness of
persons; they are simply the inexhaustible reservoir of images and
affections in which the moral life is expressed. Passions are morally
good when they contribute to a good action, evil in the opposite case.
The upright will orders the movements of the senses it appropriates to
the good and to beatitude; an evil will succumbs to disordered passions
and exacerbates them. Emotions and feelings can be taken up into the
virtues or perverted by the vices.
(Continued)

 

[po18guy]

(Continued)
This ties in with the applicable sections relating to defense of life:

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an
exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that
constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a
double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. The one is intended, the other is not."65

2264
Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality.
Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to
life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is
forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be
unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.66

2265
Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who
is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good
requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For
this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right
to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to
their responsibility.

 

[CRM_Brother]

Yes. It is not a true rebuttal per say, but rather an example which shows that this philosophical model is solely in opposition to any Christian mindset. The rebuttal gave was simply to provide a basic Christian belief which fully contradicts the philosophical stance. If you hold this as fact, then the entire philosophy kind of falls apart as you are stating as fact something which is not possible to come to know solely through an individual’s experience.