Ten Questions for philosophers from Msgr. Charles Pope

[Linusthe2nd]

1.Why is there existence?
2.Why (not how) do you exist?
3.Why are you angered when I mention God? You are not angry when I mention a duck-billed platypus or the possibility of ancient space visitors to this planet who sowed the seeds of life. But my mention of God seems to evoke a strong response in you? Why?
4.If your anger is rooted in a sense of injustice (i.e. that what I say or believe is “wrong”), why?
5.In other words, why do we human beings have a sense of justice, of right and wrong? Where does it come from and on what is it based?
6.Is there any basis for morality at all, if as a materialist you say that everything is caused by random mutation and behavior and is biologically determined?
7.Why do you say believing in God is “wrong” and atheism is “right?” On what do you base this?
8.If you point to the “evil things” believers have done such as the “Inquisition,” where does your sense of injustice come from, and why be angry with believers if we are simply doing what the chemicals in our brain made us do?
9.Why is anything wrong at all, if behavior, thought and decision are simply and biologically determined?
10.In a word, “Why?”

blog.adw.org/2013/08/why-a-simple-question-often-overlooked-or-suppressed-today-but-we-who-beleive-must-keep-asking-it-of-a-secular-world/comment-page-1/#comment-179169

Linus2nd

 

[DaveBj]

I like it!

 

[Blacksword]

1.Why is there existence?
2.Why (not how) do you exist?
3.Why are you angered when I mention God? You are not angry when I mention a duck-billed platypus or the possibility of ancient space visitors to this planet who sowed the seeds of life. But my mention of God seems to evoke a strong response in you? Why?
4.If your anger is rooted in a sense of injustice (i.e. that what I say or believe is “wrong”), why?
5.In other words, why do we human beings have a sense of justice, of right and wrong? Where does it come from and on what is it based?
6.Is there any basis for morality at all, if as a materialist you say that everything is caused by random mutation and behavior and is biologically determined?
7.Why do you say believing in God is “wrong” and atheism is “right?” On what do you base this?
8.If you point to the “evil things” believers have done such as the “Inquisition,” where does your sense of injustice come from, and why be angry with believers if we are simply doing what the chemicals in our brain made us do?
9.Why is anything wrong at all, if behavior, thought and decision are simply and biologically determined?
10.In a word, “Why?”

blog.adw.org/2013/08/why-a-simple-question-often-overlooked-or-suppressed-today-but-we-who-beleive-must-keep-asking-it-of-a-secular-world/comment-page-1/#comment-179169

Linus2nd

I’m confused, what does the author mean by “philosophers”? There are TONS of theist philosophers, even today and certainly throughout history. Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, today Feser, tons of them, why is this blog seeming to suggest philosophy is inherently antagonistic to faith or God or atheist in outlook?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Blacksword

I’m confused, what does the author mean by “philosophers”? There are TONS of theist philosophers, even today and certainly throughout history. Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, today Feser, tons of them, why is this blog seeming to suggest philosophy is inherently antagonistic to faith or God or atheist in outlook?

I agree. The question should be aimed at atheists, not philosophers.

 

[Sparkythedog]

Ghaaa!! I…can’t…control my…urge to answer…questions posed…on the…internet!

1.Why is there existence?

I had to go and read the original blog post to understand what these questions are really asking. In my mind why and how are intrinsically linked with regards to physical explanations. But that’s not what the author is asking. By “why”, it seems that he is really asking “what is the meaning of…”, so I’ll try to answer with that in mind.

The empirical mechanisms for the cause of existence are largely unknown. We have some ideas of how our universe formed but they do not answer the fundamental question of why should there be a universe at all. I’ve heard answers ranging from “God did it” to “the universe exists because it can” and none of those seem particularly compelling to me. But I don’t think the author is really asking these questions. He wants to know what this all means.

I’m not sure that there is an intrinsic meaning to things. Objects can mean different things to different people. Statues of saints in one culture may be idols to heresy in another. A well meaning compliment could be taken as an insult by another. To ask what the meaning of existence is seems as arbitrary as asking what’s the meaning of a cloud or a rock.

2.Why (not how) do you exist?

I exist because because my parents got together some decades ago. They could say my life is an expression of their love for each other. I have a predilection for making art. I might say that the meaning for my existence is to create artwork for other to enjoy. I work in the non profit sector. My coworkers might say that my existence is to help them with their various programs that they run.

3.Why are you angered when I mention God? You are not angry when I mention a duck-billed platypus or the possibility of ancient space visitors to this planet who sowed the seeds of life. But my mention of God seems to evoke a strong response in you? Why?

I have a relative with brain disorder who believes that he moved a celestial body with his mind and inadvertently caused several natural disasters here on earth. He is racked with guilt for what he thinks he did, and no amount of scientific explanation about minds and gravity and planets can talk him out of it.

I am not angry with him for stating this over and over again (it dominates any conversation with him), but it does get frustrating and that sometimes leads to anger. It’s hard for some people to deal with people who insist on believing things that don’t make sense to them. Sometimes you just want to shake that person and say “What is wrong with you!” It’s irrational and unproductive but it mostly stems from frustration.

As for ancient aliens, I don’t come across too many people who espouse that idea, so I haven’t been worn down by them yet. (I do get annoyed with the History Channel’s programming sometimes though)

I don’t know why the platypus should make people angry. I’ve heard they have a poisonous spine on their back feet that can deliver a painful scratch, so that could be annoying.

4.If your anger is rooted in a sense of injustice (i.e. that what I say or believe is “wrong”), why?

I think injustice is the wrong word - see above.

5.In other words, why do we human beings have a sense of justice, of right and wrong? Where does it come from and on what is it based?

Not just humans have a sense of morality and justice. Here’s a link to a short video:
ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals.html
(there is also reference to Hieronymus Bosch which is an added bonus)

To get deeper into this subject, it would be better to ask someone who studies this kind of thing rather than me.

 

[Sparkythedog]

…and the rest.

6.Is there any basis for morality at all, if as a materialist you say that everything is caused by random mutation and behavior and is biologically determined?

This is a bit of a strawman but I’ll let it slide due to sloppy wording. By “everything”, I’m going to assume the author means the animals we see today. And by “random mutation”, I’m going to assume the author means evolution (which is different from just random mutation).

This question is the similar to the one above. Please see my earlier response.

7.Why do you say believing in God is “wrong” and atheism is “right?” On what do you base this?

I have yet to be convinced by any God claims.

8.If you point to the “evil things” believers have done such as the “Inquisition,” where does your sense of injustice come from, and why be angry with believers if we are simply doing what the chemicals in our brain made us do?

Why we feel “injustice” towards such heinous acts is a very complicated topic. Would you want yourself or your family members tortured? I believe most people would say no and would agree not to torture others so as not to be tortured in return. This fear of mutually assured destruction is not the only basis for morality, though.

We are empathic animals. We relate to others, especially others like ourselves. We can eat a tuna without any qualms because we don’t relate to tunas in the same way as humans. Do you think you could eat a tuna after having a philosophical conversation with it? There are people who do not relate empathically towards others called sociopaths. They are not “evil”, though. They have something wrong with their brain.

It may be irrational to be angry with those who cause us harm (though it does seem to be innate in us). An understanding of why people perpetrated inquisitions or holocausts or genocides is key to ensuring that those things don’t happen again.

9.Why is anything wrong at all, if behavior, thought and decision are simply and biologically determined?

Pretty much the same question. See above.

10.In a word, “Why?”

In two words, “Why not.”

 

[Sparkythedog]

I agree. The question should be aimed at atheists, not philosophers.

I think the OP didn’t want to mention the “A” word in the Philosophy forum since its verboden.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I’m confused, what does the author mean by “philosophers”? There are TONS of theist philosophers, even today and certainly throughout history. Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, today Feser, tons of them, why is this blog seeming to suggest philosophy is inherently antagonistic to faith or God or atheist in outlook?

What he is referring to is the " philosophical " attacks against the existence of God and religious faith which is coming from the more radical groups of non-believers. I was the one who supplied the word " philosophers. " It could be a challenge to non-believing philosophers to defend themselves and to believing philosophers to defend their own positions - like the many threads in this forum.

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Blacksword

I’m confused, what does the author mean by “philosophers”? There are TONS of theist philosophers, even today and certainly throughout history. Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, today Feser, tons of them, why is this blog seeming to suggest philosophy is inherently antagonistic to faith or God or atheist in outlook?

I agree. The question should be aimed at atheists, not philosophers.

See my post # 8 below. Perhaps I didn’t say what I wanted very well.

Linus2nd

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Sparky

The word “atheist” is not banned. Threads centered on atheism are.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I think the OP didn’t want to mention the “A” word in the Philosophy forum since its verboden.

It is a little unclear exactly what is forbidden. A full blown debate about Atheism certainly would be. But to address the actual issues, the " whys" of existence, etc. would be O.K.

Linus2nd

 

[Sparkythedog]

It is a little unclear exactly what is forbidden. A full blown debate about Atheism certainly would be. But to address the actual issues, the " whys" of existence, etc. would be O.K.

Linus2nd

I think the way you worded it was fine. They are indeed philosophical questions and therefore are addressed to philosophers.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Ghaaa!! I…can’t…control my…urge to answer…questions posed…on the…internet!

I had to go and read the original blog post to understand what these questions are really asking. In my mind why and how are intrinsically linked with regards to physical explanations. But that’s not what the author is asking. By “why”, it seems that he is really asking “what is the meaning of…”, so I’ll try to answer with that in mind.

The empirical mechanisms for the cause of existence are largely unknown. We have some ideas of how our universe formed but they do not answer the fundamental question of why should there be a universe at all. I’ve heard answers ranging from “God did it” to “the universe exists because it can” and none of those seem particularly compelling to me. But I don’t think the author is really asking these questions. He wants to know what this all means.

Yes, he wants to know why more non-believers aren’t asking all these questions. How can they be satisfied without the answers, when the answers are readily available. It is just that to find the answers one has to be willing to concede that there is a valid field of study and knowledge beyond matematics and empirical science.

The problem is made worse due to the fact that most of those trained by modern education institutions aren’t even aware that there is a great, amazing field of thought dating back to the ancient Greeks, to St. Augustine, to St. Thomas Aquinas, to Cardinal Cajetan, to Jaques Maritain, which has excaped the modern mind.

I’m not sure that there is an intrinsic meaning to things. Objects can mean different things to different people. Statues of saints in one culture may be idols to heresy in another. A well meaning compliment could be taken as an insult by another. To ask what the meaning of existence is seems as arbitrary as asking what’s the meaning of a cloud or a rock.

Aren’t you curious about how you got here, how the world got here, what happens after you die? If you are not satisfied with what you have heard perhaps you should begin to look for the answers - with an open mind.i

I exist because because my parents got together some decades ago. They could say my life is an expression of their love for each other.

But you see, your parents caused only your " coming to be, " they did not cause your existence. How could they, they didn’t cause their own, so they couldn’t cause yours. They might be able to explain the biology but they can’t explain the fact of your existence.

What is the one thing all things or substances or beings in the universe have in common, the one and only thing? Existence! They are. Besides the " what " they are, there is an act of existence, which makes them to be a " this" or a " that." So where did this act of existence, that makes you, your parents, the moon, your pet dog, etc. be, come from?

I have a predilection for making art. I might say that the meaning for my existence is to create artwork for other to enjoy. I work in the non profit sector. My coworkers might say that my existence is to help them with their various programs that they run.

That’s fine. But wouldn’t also like to know what to do that may make them happy for all eternity? Wouldn’t you like to be happy for all eternity?

I have a relative with brain disorder who believes that he moved a celestial body with his mind and inadvertently caused several natural disasters here on earth. He is racked with guilt for what he thinks he did, and no amount of scientific explanation about minds and gravity and planets can talk him out of it.

For some people, all you can do is give them love and attention. You can also pray for them.

I am not angry with him for stating this over and over again (it dominates any conversation with him), but it does get frustrating and that sometimes leads to anger. It’s hard for some people to deal with people who insist on believing things that don’t make sense to them. Sometimes you just want to shake that person and say “What is wrong with you!” It’s irrational and unproductive but it mostly stems from frustration.

I have a freind who has a one tracked mind also, but not that bad. Just be patient.

As for ancient aliens, I don’t come across too many people who espouse that idea, so I haven’t been worn down by them yet. (I do get annoyed with the History Channel’s programming sometimes though)

I don’t watch T.V., haven’t for two years now.

I don’t know why the platypus should make people angry. I’ve heard they have a poisonous spine on their back feet that can deliver a painful scratch, so that could be annoying.

I think injustice is the wrong word - see above.

Not just humans have a sense of morality and justice. Here’s a link to a short video:
ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals.html
(there is also reference to Hieronymus Bosch which is an added bonus)

To get deeper into this subject, it would be better to ask someone who studies this kind of thing rather than me.

Have you ever read the Bible, it has some good answers, it poses some great challenges. Why not give it a try?

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

…and the rest.

This is a bit of a strawman but I’ll let it slide due to sloppy wording. By “everything”, I’m going to assume the author means the animals we see today. And by “random mutation”, I’m going to assume the author means evolution (which is different from just random mutation).

I think it is a very good question. Don’t you see that if there isn’t an Ultimate law giver there is no justification to say " this is just wrong, " or " this is just the right thing to do? "
Or why is it that sometimes you do somithing and immediately you feel guilty about it? If there is no Ultimate law giver to whom we owe obedience, why should we ever feel guilty about anything we do?

This question is the similar to the one above. Please see my earlier response.

I have yet to be convinced by any God claims.

But are you positive He doesn’t exist? Don’t you think it is worth looking into?

Why we feel “injustice” towards such heinous acts is a very complicated topic. Would you want yourself or your family members tortured? I believe most people would say no and would agree not to torture others so as not to be tortured in return. This fear of mutually assured destruction is not the only basis for morality, though.

Don’t you see though that is exactly the point? If there is no God to Whom we are accountable, there is no reason to think that anything is unjust.

We are empathic animals. We relate to others, especially others like ourselves. We can eat a tuna without any qualms because we don’t relate to tunas in the same way as humans. Do you think you could eat a tuna after having a philosophical conversation with it? There are people who do not relate empathically towards others called sociopaths. They are not “evil”, though. They have something wrong with their brain.

But if God doesn’t exist, there is no rational reason to be empathetic. Maby the " sociopaths " are correct. If God doesn’t exist, " sociopath " is a meaningless word. We can lock them up, but we can’t condemn their behavior.

It may be irrational to be angry with those who cause us harm (though it does seem to be innate in us). An understanding of why people perpetrated inquisitions or holocausts or genocides is key to ensuring that those things don’t happen again.

But you see, without God there really isn’t anything we can say to them. This is why Faith based 12 step programs are vastly superior to Secular based 12 step programs. This is a proven fact.

Pretty much the same question. See above.

In two words, “Why not.”

Yes. And that is the point. Why not? Without God, we shouldn’t feel guilty about anything we do, and we shouldn’t feel angry or frustrated or disappointed about the way people behave.

There is a good book you could read. It is cheep, you can even check it out of the larger library systems. " Aquinas " by Edward Feser, a former Atheist.

Linus2nd

 

[Sparkythedog]

Aren’t you curious about how you got here, how the world got here, what happens after you die? If you are not satisfied with what you have heard perhaps you should begin to look for the answers - with an open mind.i

I think you’re forgetting that the original question was “why” or "the meaning of…"and not “how”. We have a good deal of empirical knowledge about how the world originated and how humans “got here”. As for what happens after you die, I haven’t seen any evidence we do much of anything except decay.

I am always looking for answers and I’m always open to new ideas. But I don’t just believe something because an authority says it. You need some kind of evidence behind your statements to show that they are valid.

But you see, your parents caused only your " coming to be, " they did not cause your existence. How could they, they didn’t cause their own, so they couldn’t cause yours. They might be able to explain the biology but they can’t explain the fact of your existence.

What is the one thing all things or substances or beings in the universe have in common, the one and only thing? Existence! They are. Besides the " what " they are, there is an act of existence, which makes them to be a " this" or a " that." So where did this act of existence, that makes you, your parents, the moon, your pet dog, etc. be, come from?

The question was about the meaning of my existence, not existence itself. Also you are asking “how” again and not “why” as it was phrased in the original question.

As for how existence came to be (or what the nature of existence is) I don’t know. I’m not even sure that it is coherent to ask where existence came from.

That’s fine. But wouldn’t also like to know what to do that may make them happy for all eternity? Wouldn’t you like to be happy for all eternity?

We’re veering off the topic now. But yes I would love for them to be happy for all eternity. Unfortunately I haven’t seen any reason to think that they (or I) will be around for that long. So I’ll have to settle for making people happy now.

For some people, all you can do is give them love and attention. You can also pray for them.

I have a freind who has a one tracked mind also, but not that bad. Just be patient.

I think you’re missing my point. I’m not complaining about my relative, I’m making an analogy as to why some people get angry with those who believe in Gods or spirits or other things that cannot be empirically verified.

Have you ever read the Bible, it has some good answers, it poses some great challenges. Why not give it a try?

I was raised a practicing Catholic and confirmed in the church. I heard many “answers” from many different people and found none of them particularly satisfying or unique to Catholicism. If you have some specific things in mind please feel free to send them my way. Like I said, I’m always open to new ideas.

 

[Sparkythedog]

Don’t you see that if there isn’t an Ultimate law giver there is no justification to say " this is just wrong, " or " this is just the right thing to do? "
Or why is it that sometimes you do somithing and immediately you feel guilty about it? If there is no Ultimate law giver to whom we owe obedience, why should we ever feel guilty about anything we do?

I’ve given my perspective on this question several times now so let me put it back to you. How does having a ultimate law giver make an action immoral or moral? In other words how does “God says it’s wrong” make something wrong?

But are you positive He doesn’t exist? Don’t you think it is worth looking into?

No, I am not positive that there are no Gods outside of my range of detection. I can only investigate the claims that are laid out before me. If someone has a specific God claim that they would like me to investigate, I would be more than happy to do so.

Don’t you see though that is exactly the point? If there is no God to Whom we are accountable, there is no reason to think that anything is unjust.

Please reread what you were responding to. I don’t think you understood what I was saying there.

But if God doesn’t exist, there is no rational reason to be empathetic. Maby the " sociopaths " are correct. If God doesn’t exist, " sociopath " is a meaningless word. We can lock them up, but we can’t condemn their behavior.

I don’t think I can turn my empathy on and off at will. It is not a rational decision. It seems to be an innate trait in humans. We feel empathy towards our own kind.

Sociopathy is not “correct” or “incorrect”. It is a brain condition. Sociopaths generally lack the ability to feel empathy. Also, sociopaths are not necessarily violent. We don’t just lock people up because they’re a sociopath.

Let me ask you another question. Let’s imagine that there is no God and that we are just primates living on the Savannah in Africa. What are the advantages to having a trait like empathy? Why might that trait be favored over sociopathy?

But you see, without God there really isn’t anything we can say to them. This is why Faith based 12 step programs are vastly superior to Secular based 12 step programs. This is a proven fact.

What do you mean that without God there is nothing you can say? Didn’t the inquisition involve God and God’s church in some way? What does the 12 step program have to do with killing? I’m confused…

Yes. And that is the point. Why not? Without God, we shouldn’t feel guilty about anything we do, and we shouldn’t feel angry or frustrated or disappointed about the way people behave.

Again, I have to ask, why would the existence of God make me feel any more guilty about hurting someone?

There is a good book you could read. It is cheep, you can even check it out of the larger library systems. " Aquinas " by Edward Feser, a former Atheist.

I will check the local library system here to see if I can find it. Is there any chapter in particular that relates to our conversation that I should read first?

 

[weller2]

1.Why is there existence?

And why did God create Universe?

2.Why (not how) do you exist?

And why did God make you, Monsignor?

3.Why are you angered when I mention God? You are not angry when I mention a duck-billed platypus or the possibility of ancient space visitors to this planet who sowed the seeds of life. But my mention of God seems to evoke a strong response in you? Why?

For the same reason, Monsignor, that the founder of your religion was was angered at Pharisees. It’s not that you mention God. It’s that you have appropriated God, twisted Him to fit your agenda, and made yourselves an intermediary between people and God, so that you, not God, have to be worshipped. You preach poverty, yet wear expensive robes; you preach chastity, yet shield child molesters; you preach peace, yet bless machine guns.
You claim to be the shepherds who lead people to God, yet, you are guards who block access to Him.

4.If your anger is rooted in a sense of injustice (i.e. that what I say or believe is “wrong”), why?

But Monsignor, the problem is not injustice, the problem is contradiction. Let me remind you that it was your Pope who was found dead in mysterious circumstances after 33 days of reign. It was your banker who was found hanged in circumstances suggesting a ritual murder. It was your bank that was laundering mafia money. It is your basillica which became an eternal resting place for a mafia boss. It was your high priest who fathered children and molested them. We know, Monsignor, what your God commands. Truly, Monsignor, if your God is indeed what you claim He is, why didn’t the rain of fire yet descend on the city on Tiber?

And if it is because God has mercy on you, then why wouldn’t God have mercy on us, who do no evil, and sin with mere unbelief?

5.In other words, why do we human beings have a sense of justice, of right and wrong? Where does it come from and on what is it based?

7.Why do you say believing in God is “wrong” and atheism is “right?” On what do you base this?

Truth be told, we have some ideas, but we don’t know.

But we DO know that a good God cannot command genocide (see Amalekites). It’s not that atheism is right, it’s that your God is self-contradictory.

8.If you point to the “evil things” believers have done such as the “Inquisition,” where does your sense of injustice come from, and why be angry with believers if we are simply doing what the chemicals in our brain made us do?

Monsignor, stop kicking the dead horse of Inquisition, put away your strawmen, and read a book on neuroscience. Brain chemicals control simple things; sadness, happyness, lust, attachment, aggression, and so on. If you, Monsignor, can identify a chemical which can make someone write a complicated and consistent document such as Crimen sollicitationis then truly, go to Oslo, for the Nobel prize in medicine is yours. Such calculated and collective evil, Monsignor, cannot be blamed on simple imbalance of neurotransmitters.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I’m too tired to respond now, will try tomorrow sometime - probably late in the evening.

Linus2nd

 

[inocente]

It looks like the Monsignor thought he had a point to the questions, and the point was the answer given in the video, which he reckoned would have atheists crying in their beer at the wondrousness of it all.

Trouble is, neither the questions nor the answer radiate any enthusiasm or encouragement and instead just invite empty arguing about abstract irrelevances. There’s no mention of Christ, no mention of anything important to peoples’ lives, just the teleological argument dressed up as ye olde music of the spheres.

It’s not hard to find good Christian music that gives reasons relevant to peoples’ lives, although it’s a strange thing about American Catholics that they should be embarrassed to talk about Christ or emotion.

Alison Krauss & Union Station - There Is A Reason

 

[Linusthe2nd]

It looks like the Monsignor thought he had a point to the questions, and the point was the answer given in the video, which he reckoned would have atheists crying in their beer at the wondrousness of it all.

Trouble is, neither the questions nor the answer radiate any enthusiasm or encouragement and instead just invite empty arguing about abstract irrelevances. There’s no mention of Christ, no mention of anything important to peoples’ lives, just the teleological argument dressed up as ye olde music of the spheres.

It’s not hard to find good Christian music that gives reasons relevant to peoples’ lives, although it’s a strange thing about American Catholics that they should be embarrassed to talk about Christ or emotion.

Alison Krauss & Union Station - There Is A Reason

I didn’t watch Msgr’s video because it is the solid facts which reach me. I had trouble with your video, couldn’t make out the words. The only thing I would say about that is that beauty in all its forms speaks of God’s existence but of course, " de gusitbus non disputandum ext. "

Catholics aren’t embarrassed to speak about Christ, we have several Forums at C.A. which deal specifically with strictly religion and religious topics. And for me personally, it is Christ, as the summation of Divine Revelation which is the most convincing argument for God’s existence ( and all the facts of Divine Revelation leading up to Christ.) Some people are moved by Divine Revelation, some are not.

Emotion, per se, seems a very poor approach, maybe that is just me.

Linus2nd.