All too often mystical ideas have been confused with the experiences and then integrated
into philosophical systems as if they were the product of reasoning.
In Science and the Modern World, we noted how White - head first criticized the introduction of God
into philosophical systems and then himself introduced him.
Not exact matches
In my experience, natural law is the second most ridiculed
philosophical system and is well known to be nothing more than an attempt to inject religion
into philosophical conversation.
While I appreciate Joseph Bottum's
philosophical objection to capital punishment, he fails to take
into account the justice
system that he claims to prefer.
Depending on how you draw up definitions, the first can blend
into the second, and even the second and third can overlap on some belief
systems and
philosophical overviews (such as from Whitehead — if you're wondering who he is, he co-wrote the modern founding treatise of logic).
Over against it he sets up a
philosophical system of cosmic determinisrn, a sort of universal wheel of time on which life and nature and history are forever wearily repeating themselves as often as the cycle of time brings round once more the things that have receded
into the past.
This initially occurs in Descartes and Spinoza, but it becomes far more comprehensive in Schelling and Hegel, and so much so that the whole body of dogmatic theology undergoes a metamorphosis
into pure
philosophical thinking in Hegel's
system.
That means that we shall have to enter
into philosophical and cultural - linguistic
systems other than our own and show in their terms that what we say makes sense, or that that
system is in itself confused on its own terms, and that we are prepared to abandon our beliefs if they can not make sense in other viable
systems and hence are not universal in significance.
Whitehead notes that «an old established metaphysical
system gains a false air of adequate precision from the fact that its words and phrases have passed
into current literature» (PR 13), leading to a «false» presumption of descriptive precision that assumes the obvious simplicity of the
philosophical statements offered.
But it also inaugurates an entire history of
philosophical epochs, one succeeding another — pagan, Christian, secular, it makes no difference — crystallizing
into one or another
system of abstractions and then dissolving again.
The Faith theology of what happens in the change of bread and wine at Mass
into Christ's own Body and Blood involves a quite different
philosophical framework from that of St Thomas Aquinas: Faith draws on a modern view of the co-relativity of all matter; Aquinas depends more on an Aristotelian
system of form and matter.
On a
philosophical level, I couldn't do it anymore because I felt I was contributing to everything that was wrong with the
system instead of trying to do something to make things better, at least for the few people I was coming
into contact with.