Page 1 of 1

Miracles

PostPosted: July 24th, 2008, 11:49 pm
by Paul F. Ford

PostPosted: July 25th, 2008, 8:03 pm
by Sven
Perhaps the edition information so your correspondent could compare the original version to the revised Miracles.

If chapter 3 is his main interest, he might want to read Elizabeth Anscombe's rebuttal from the Socratic Club debate in volume 2 of The Collected Papers of G. E. M. Anscombe.

If his interest in less for research, and more focused on modern discussions of the topic, perhaps James Beilby's Naturalism Defeated as a starting point?

Ms. Carter's outline was well done. Nicely summarizes the book.

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: December 14th, 2009, 1:50 am
by Patterner
Well, it's been more than a year since the posts in this thread were made. I hope people stop by occasionally. :D

Short introduction... I'm an agnostic. When I see enough evidence for a creator, I'll believe there is one. So far, I haven't seen any. I'm not remotely unsatisfied with my beliefs, or the lack thereof. I do, however, think religion in general is something to look into a good deal more than many other subjects. Even if the fact that the overwhelming majority of humans throughout history have believed in a creator isn't evidence for a creator (not saying it isn't, just not sure it really qualifies), I think it's a good idea to try to understand the majority of humans throughout history. Therefore, I read about it and talk to people. I think Conversations With God, Fools Crow: Wisdom and Power, and Eknath Easwaran's introductions to his translations of the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita are absolutely amazing works. Filled with beauty and wisdom, even if I don't have reason to believe they represent the truth of existence.

So, while debating various aspects of our beliefs online with an Orthodox guy, he suggested Miracles. And, lo and behold, Chapter 3 is what I'm here to ask about. I don't understand something, and I don't see how to go on before I do. Maybe someone can help me. I'm not sure what Lewis means in his paragraphs about the word because. If I do understand him, I disagree with him. It seems he's saying we gain knowledge by way of Ground and Consequent. "Grandfather must be ill today because he hasn't got up yet (and we know he is an invariably early riser when he is well)." But we don't gain knowledge in that way. That's something that makes us suspect something - that gramps is sick. But we learn - we gain knowledge - whether or not he is via other methods. And even if it is proven that he is, indeed, sick, the Ground and Consequent that made us suspicious in the first place is not any part of the proof.

I think I disagree with more in the next several paragraphs, but, until I'm sure what he meant there, I can't say for sure.

Can anyone help?

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: December 16th, 2009, 5:05 pm
by Patterner
And I see the guy I mentioned is a member here. Hey, rus! :snow-smile:

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: December 19th, 2009, 1:22 pm
by rusmeister

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: December 19th, 2009, 7:03 pm
by arowhena
Paul,

While, as far as I know, Lewis was not a Catholic; but with a subject matter concerning the Miraculous I suggest the source itself.

A good start would be, “Catechism of the Catholic Church;” and as a backup only, for ideas and all the (gory) details, “Butler’s Lives of the Saints.”

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: December 20th, 2009, 7:48 pm
by archenland_knight
Patterner,

Welcome. I have not yet read "Miracles", so I can't comment on your specific post. However, since you mention that you're an agnostic simply wishing to investigate religion, I would think reading "Miracles" would be a little specialized for what you are looking for. As far as Lewis' works go, have you read Mere Christianity yet? It covers a little bit broader spectrum of topics and viewpoints. I would definitely recommend it.

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: January 1st, 2010, 4:39 am
by Patterner
Hi Knight.

Yeah, I read Mere Christianity. And I don't agree with him on his basic premise. Heh. But rus thought maybe Miracles would be worth trying. I just want to be sure I understand his point in that section. Being in the beginning of his line of reasoning, it's tough to go on if I disagree with it. I'd already know I disagree with all that comes after, after all, eh? I tried that with MC. I read well past the point where I first disagree. Now, a couple years later, I've started rereading it, to see if I'd changed my feelings on it. Which I haven't. Which makes me think it's not too likely I'll agree with him on this, either. Still, I thought it was worth finding out. :D

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: January 4th, 2010, 3:35 am
by Adam Linton

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: March 15th, 2010, 3:33 pm
by Nerd42

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: March 15th, 2010, 4:46 pm
by paminala

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: March 23rd, 2010, 6:26 pm
by Nerd42

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: March 24th, 2010, 2:39 pm
by paminala
It seems I owe you an apology for my somewhat snarky post. I read your remarks as a rather elitist attitude and I was wrong. In fact it seems that in many ways we agree on this point. Moral behaviour is fighting an uphill battle against the "Jerry Springer Generation"

Re: Miracles

PostPosted: March 30th, 2010, 11:56 pm
by Nerd42