At 1:26 PM -0500 12/10/04, Christopher D. Green wrote:
While I'm more or les inclined to agree with your analysis, Nancy, I think what they journalist (NOTE!) means by this is that Flew is convinced by a kind of "inference to the best explanation" on the issue of first cause of the universe, rather than on the basis of a "personal experience of the divine" or some such. (Isn't there a point where the "best" available explanation is so bad that it is not worth inferring, even pro tem, and so we should just hold off adhering to *any* specific belief on the matter until we think of something better?)

It is intersting that religious folk are celebrating Flew's "conversion" as a "victory." There was a time when one would have been excommunicated (or worse) for "merely" being a deist of this sort. Averroes got in a good deal of trouble for this sort of thing, as I recall. (And some American evangelists spend a good deal of time trying to *deny* that Thomas Jefferson and several other of the "Founding Fathers" were deists of pretty much this same ilk.)

Actually Jefferson was more more a Unitarian/Universalist than a Deist.
Franklin on the other hand was probably closer to a closet atheist; Washington simply couldn't stand being in a church.
--
"No one in this world, so far as I know, has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." -H. L. Mencken


* PAUL K. BRANDON                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]  *
* Psychology Dept               Minnesota State University  *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001     ph 507-389-6217  *
*        http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html        *

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to