BaalChatzaf Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 .The spring 2013 issue of The Objective Standard includes the complete, unedited transcript of the debate.I see Rand and Jesus in the back ground. Who are the foreground characters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 .The spring 2013 issue of The Objective Standard includes the complete, unedited transcript of the debate.I see Rand and Jesus in the back ground. Who are the foreground characters?Dinesen dsouza and a swelt Andrew Berstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike82ARP Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 As much as I dislike an uber-parochial closed Objectivist like Bernstein, I did not think D’Souza did a very competent job defending his premise. He conflates reason with empiricism and his definition of “faith” is off. Of course, you’ll also find that Christians from different denominations define faith differently which further confuses the issue.Here is a commentary from a friend who also wasn't pleased with D’Souza’s performance.http://thechristianegoist.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/dsouza-vs-bernstein-is-either-good-for-mankind/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 As much as I dislike an uber-parochial closed Objectivist like Bernstein, I did not think D’Souza did a very competent job defending his premise. He conflates reason with empiricism and his definition of “faith” is off. Of course, you’ll also find that Christians from different denominations define faith differently which further confuses the issue.Here is a commentary from a friend who also wasn't pleased with D’Souza’s performance.http://thechristianegoist.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/dsouza-vs-bernstein-is-either-good-for-mankind/Well worth reading, though I only got 3/4 through it. Your friend is highly knowledgable and writes cogently.It's good to see that position so honestly articulated by someone who understands philosophy. Except for the rationalizations.But let others comment on it.This bit is fascinating:"How would this supremely rational God feel about men who claimed to value truth [Objectivists] regarding every other aspect of reality, but not regarding His existence and nature - which are foundational to the rest of nature?"(I've wondered about what God would "feel" about someone who's spent his life ignoring Him.Does it depend on His mood. Or should we create a Good God, one who admires his finest Creation for thinking for themselves with their God-given minds?So, He won't feel too bad - or maybe even great. "Welcome to Heaven, my boy!!!")But the writer demurs:"Therefore evasive reasoning, inconsistent epistemologies, subjective emphases, and sincere claims about valuing the truth [again, Objectivists] will NOT cut it in His court."Absorbing read, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now