tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-439331035718369167.post8631490743753789916..comments2024-02-09T02:48:13.776-06:00Comments on Daily Meditations with Fr. Alfonse: Mt 13.1-9 The Sower in the Modern WorldFr. Alfonsehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02557206560119402976noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-439331035718369167.post-23136062502327902972014-07-24T11:01:03.404-05:002014-07-24T11:01:03.404-05:00Anonymous Anonymous said...
Talk 'bout science...Anonymous Anonymous said...<br />Talk 'bout science: Just read this: http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=6190<br /><br />Catholic school students have higher graduation rates than public school kids. Looks like a Catholic education helps kids distinguish between the real world and fantasy world - that is, a world where you don't need a college degree.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-439331035718369167.post-12646185956223735462014-07-23T22:53:33.427-05:002014-07-23T22:53:33.427-05:00Brian/Benedict:
I have to agree with Benedict on ...Brian/Benedict:<br /><br />I have to agree with Benedict on this one. Doubt as a destination in and of itself is borne of two things: pride and fear. Pride, because people, like Hawking, who use doubt as a destination don't doubt themselves. Why? Because they are arrogant. As Benedict opines, "they refuse to believe God can be known because they could never find God themselves; if brilliant intellectuals like them could not find Him, obviously the whole thing must be made up." They have elevated doubt to some disingenuous intellectual virtue. But, like every good math problem, there is an answer, even if we haven't discovered the answer yet or if we are too blind to admit that someone else has. <br /><br />Doubt as a destination is also borne from fear, fear of being wrong. It's easier to say you doubt than to actually put yourself out there and take a stance. Why are we so afraid? We have nothing to lose if we believe and we are wrong and everything to gain if we are correct.violinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07996177657604656859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-439331035718369167.post-48795215637752446472014-07-23T13:51:51.131-05:002014-07-23T13:51:51.131-05:00Brian! How good to hear from you! I mean that. I&#...Brian! How good to hear from you! I mean that. I'm glad to see you still read this blog from time to time.<br /><br />Concerning your comment, allow me to explain what I claim. I claim that doubt, genuine or otherwise, serves as point of departure for human inquiry, not as a destination. If I start with doubt, I should end with certainty. I ask a question because I do not know the answer, or doubt the answer already given, and I seek a workable logical solution.<br /><br />When Russell and Hawking, both extremely talented mathematicians, arrive at doubt with the intention of staying there, I have to suspect their motives. If one were to start a math problem, they intend to finish it, not leave it unsolved. Any kind of problem demands a response, even a wrong one. It's absurd to claim that the limbo of doubt is an acceptable end. Objective truth remains to be discovered whether you doubt that or not. To me, what Russell, Hawking, and all the others who have elevated doubt into a positive virtue seem to do is confront a problem they can't solve, like the existence of God, at least not from their perspective, and declare it can't be solved by anyone, and that anyone who has solved it must be wrong, even if they can't prove that. Why would they do this? You could say they have "genuine doubt" and that they really believe God cannot be known; but if this doubt is truly genuine, they would have to doubt themselves, which they never do. They are intractably dogmatic about their skepticism, writing books about how wonderful it is. What is more likely is that they refuse to believe God can be known because they could never find God themselves; if brilliant intellectuals like them could not find Him, obviously the whole thing must be made up. Hence I make the assertion that they mask their skepticism as something virtuous to cover a very real and stubborn pride lying within. <br /><br />Can I read their minds? No, but I can read their actions and their words, and deduce a judgment on the matter. Benedict Augustinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07274188116075677081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-439331035718369167.post-17232889015522471412014-07-23T09:31:13.460-05:002014-07-23T09:31:13.460-05:00"Stubborn atheists like Bertrand Russell or S..."Stubborn atheists like Bertrand Russell or Stephen Hawking use doubt as a way to mask their pride."<br /><br />I would say they genuinely doubt -- are you claiming you can read their minds?Brian Westleynoreply@blogger.com