Secular philosophy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlotte408
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Charlotte408

Guest
Hello!!

I’ve never posted here before (philosophy), but this semester I’m taking a philosophy class at my public community college, so I thought as a precursor I’d get some insight from my CAF friends! I’ve read ONE peice from plato, LOL…so thats pretty much all my philosophical experience … But I am very interested and looking forward to this class.

If you dont mind, please leave any insightful comments you may have…advice…forewarnings LOL…or, if you are very well educated in this field, please PLEASE at least subscribe to this thread, because as the class goes on if (or rather WHEN) I have questions I’ll return and present them.

I’ve noticed a LOT of classes I’ve taken tend to have biased teachers…that usually have some degree of content for the CC or religion in general, so I’m sure sooner or later I’ll need you guys…thanks!!
 
Just keep in mind that a vast majority of Philosphers, especially if your instructor has a PhD, tend to be at least agnostic, if not out-right atheist. Many of the “greatest” philosophers in the past 500 years have been atheist as well.

Just remember that the purpose of philosophy is not to just say “God did it” and walk away. The whole point of philosophy is to “think” about things and explain them using human intellect and reason, generally without making any room for God.

A good instructor should not tell you what to think, he/she should teach you how to think, just don’t be surprised if that “thinking” doesn’t make any room for Christianity.

Hope this helps.
 
Soren Kierkangaard comes to mind as a great Christian Philosopher, if you wanted to know.
 
As someone once said, we’re all ignorant, just about different things. Philosophy profs, in my experience, tend to be surprisingly ignorant about the faith, but they often don’t let that stop them from commenting on it. But there are many exceptions to that rule. Good luck!
 
I suggest learning the philosophical lingo of St. Thomas and Aristotle – in my opinion the greatest philosophers that ever existed.

Leo XIII said in Aeterne Patris that Aquinas wrote in such a principled manner that he put to route every error that came before him and that could ever follow him. (Pretty powerful words.)

So, if you want to become as bullet proof as you can to secular philosophy, learn how to read Thomas (it is no easy task, for sure). The scholastic method he uses makes him very “encyclopedic” as well, offering solutions to questions as they arise.
 
oOo…JP! I’m on it…that sounds like good reading- I’ll go see what I can find on St. Thomas and get a head start 🙂
 
JP2Admirer said:
I suggest learning the philosophical lingo of St. Thomas and Aristotle – in my opinion the greatest philosophers that ever existed.

Leo XIII said in Aeterne Patris that Aquinas wrote in such a principled manner that he put to route every error that came before him and that could ever follow him. (Pretty powerful words.)

So, if you want to become as bullet proof as you can to secular philosophy, learn how to read Thomas (it is no easy task, for sure). The scholastic method he uses makes him very “encyclopedic” as well, offering solutions to questions as they arise.
Click to expand...
Don’t try to become bullet-proof - that will prevent you from thinking. Leo’s (pbuh) judgment on Aquinas is also wildly exaggerated - perhaps an awareness of St. Thomas’s own assessment of his work being like straw in comparison to the reality of God should balance such enthusiastic statements from his disciples. Better to stay humble, remember that any of us always has a lot to learn, and do whatever you do in a spirit of humble devotion to the truth and with the intent of devoting your efforts to the glory of God, who will be with you to guide you, and who far exceeds anything we can conceive (and of course you can learn that *from *St. Thomas, I’m certainly not knocking him).
 
Betterave said:
Don’t try to become bullet-proof - that will prevent you from thinking. Leo’s (pbuh) judgment on Aquinas is also wildly exaggerated - perhaps an awareness of St. Thomas’s own assessment of his work being like straw in comparison to the reality of God should balance such enthusiastic statements from his disciples. Better to stay humble, remember that any of us always has a lot to learn, and do whatever you do in a spirit of humble devotion to the truth and with the intent of devoting your efforts to the glory of God, who will be with you to guide you, and who far exceeds anything we can conceive (and of course you can learn that *from *St. Thomas, I’m certainly not knocking him).
Click to expand...
I beg to differ about the bullet-proof comment. I didn’t mean to suggest a kind of closed mindedness. Aquinas was such a great thinker because of his humility in the face of the truth.

I once had a conversation with a professor about this very topic – he suggested that there was a temptation amongst Thomists to treat Aquinas as if he had all the answers. My reply was that we know he didn’t have all the answers, just most of them. 😃

You probably can tell I am an enthusiastic Thomist so I might be a bit blinded by perspective, but we all are.

With Chesterton I have to say that modern man doesn’t have a moral problem, he has a thinking one. Leo XIII perceived this as well and no doctor of the faith has received as much papal praise as St. Thomas.

His method was much more “open-minded” than most modern philosophers as he supplied at least three objections to each of his arguments. That is why he makes one impervious because he has thought about these things before the moderns, and showed their inadequacies before they were thinking and writing. If only people were listening to that dumb ox from the dark ages!
 
Charlotte408 said:
oOo…JP! I’m on it…that sounds like good reading- I’ll go see what I can find on St. Thomas and get a head start 🙂
Click to expand...
You can find his Summa Theologica here. Also, if you need some help with the language, I have some training and would be willing to help you. He is not easy to read at first as there are some Aristotelian categories and language that make him difficult.
 
your awesome Jp…wish I had friends like you in real life …

((class is startin’ gotta run))
 
Charlotte408 said:
Hello!!

I’ve never posted here before (philosophy), but this semester I’m taking a philosophy class at my public community college, so I thought as a precursor I’d get some insight from my CAF friends! I’ve read ONE peice from plato, LOL…so thats pretty much all my philosophical experience … But I am very interested and looking forward to this class.

If you dont mind, please leave any insightful comments you may have…advice…forewarnings LOL…or, if you are very well educated in this field, please PLEASE at least subscribe to this thread, because as the class goes on if (or rather WHEN) I have questions I’ll return and present them.

I’ve noticed a LOT of classes I’ve taken tend to have biased teachers…that usually have some degree of content for the CC or religion in general, so I’m sure sooner or later I’ll need you guys…thanks!!
Click to expand...
Philosophy means love of wisdom philo=love sophia=wisdom. To exel at philosophy all you need do is love to learn and have a desire to get wisdom. It is not the easiest disipline to master but the more you do it the easier it becomes. And remeber what Socrates the father of western philosophy taught-the practice of philosophy is nessasary for the living of a good life-. And if your teachers are biased then just challenge them play the “devils advocate” (something I loved to do when I was taking it in university) they may have their own views but any good teacher wants you to challenge them becuse that shows you are truly learning to think and look for the truth. Question, question and question do that and you will become skilled in philosophy.
 
WHEWWWW…

well I gotta tell you guys, this is NOT what I was expecting at all. LOL. I thought we were going to talk about, idk, issues…situations, and …explore them…critical thinking…that kinda stuff…

Right now, we are making these ‘truth tables’, where we first determine if its even a VALID arguement. Not based on WHAT is said, or wether its true or not, but, just if the format I guess is valid…ITS SO WEIRD! lol…and theres NO way, to memorize all these different patterns these tables come in, and the teacher is like, dont worry about understanding why an T goes here or an F goes here…its too complicated…LOL

And it is…omgoodness…Thank gawd the whole semester is going to be open book!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top