Understanding, and the Skeptic

[Jonesboy]

Understanding is a dualism- it seems to offer the prospect of something that can be understood and the same something that cannot be understood.

But, think of this, something the “same” cannot be the same, or even different, if it cannot be understood!

Experience is immediate, and never understood.

The religious skeptic argues for understanding. But by asking for it he plunges us into a dualism, where there is a something that is independent of, or else prior to, our experience.

May we not fall into that trap and argue for a hidden something but, rather, we ought to argue for a something that is the condition for any thing.

 

[a_theist91]

what drivel! saying something vaguely enough doesn’t lend it credibility or depth.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Understanding is a dualism- it seems to offer the prospect of something that can be understood and the same something that cannot be understood.

But, think of this, something the “same” cannot be the same, or even different, if it cannot be understood!

Experience is immediate, and never understood.

The religious skeptic argues for understanding. But by asking for it he plunges us into a dualism, where there is a something that is independent of, or else prior to, our experience.

May we not fall into that trap and argue for a hidden something but, rather, we ought to argue for a something that is the condition for any thing.

This is a little difficult to understand, can you point me to some information about your argument elsewhere?

 

[DPMartin]

Understanding is a dualism- it seems to offer the prospect of something that can be understood and the same something that cannot be understood.

But, think of this, something the “same” cannot be the same, or even different, if it cannot be understood!

Experience is immediate, and never understood.

The religious skeptic argues for understanding. But by asking for it he plunges us into a dualism, where there is a something that is independent of, or else prior to, our experience.

May we not fall into that trap and argue for a hidden something but, rather, we ought to argue for a something that is the condition for any thing.

Jonesboy

The up right see the road, therefore know the road and understand were it will lead them to, but the blind see nothing but their own desire. It is easy for the blind to lead the blind, for they go by what they feel and call it experience. It is the wise that knows that the Way of Life is always higher then themselves. It is the up right that seek to give sight to the blind, that they may receive what they have received of God. But the wicked hate the up right and seek to throw stumbling blocks in the way, like they do to the blind, because it get the result, they desire when they do the same to the blind. But they know not the Way, therefore they can’t see it. Nor do they understand where it is.

When Jesus Christ was on the Cross was He going by what He was experiencing or the Truth of God? His Knowedge and Understanding thereof.