Credo!

Tertullian is widely regarded as having originated the expression “Credo quia absurdum” (est) (I believe because it is absurd) and the phrase often appears in contemporary polemics about the rationality of religious belief. Patristic scholars have long pointed out that Tertullian never said this or meant anything like it. (although as I have explained many times in Harmonia Philosophica, there is nothing wrong with the irrational – it is the logical which is unfounded and full of fallacies) However, little scholarly attention has been paid to the circumstances in which this specific phrase came into existence and why, in spite of its dubious provenance, it continues to be regarded by many as a legitimate characterization of religious faith. A new paper shows how Tertullian’s original expression – “It is certain, because impossible” – was first misrepresented and modified in the early modern period. In seventeenth century England a “credo” version – I believe because it is impossible – became the common form of Tertullian’s maxim. A further modification, building on the first, was effected by the Enlightenment philosophe Voltaire, who added the “absurdity condition” and gave us the modern version of the paradox: I believe because it is absurd. These modifications played a significant role in Enlightenment representations of religion as irrational, and signal the beginning of a new understanding of faith as an epistemic vice. This doubtful maxim continues to play a role in debates about the cognitive status of religious faith, and its failure to succumb to the historical evidence against it is owing to its ongoing rhetorical usefulness in such debates. (1)

People once understood the irrationality of existence.

Then they invented Logic.

And they tried to formulate logical ways to believe in God. Let’s not forget that the founder of Logic believed in the Unmoved Mover. And the second greatest logician of all times (Gödel) formulated a renowned proof for the existence of God.

Then came “Enlightenment”.

And tried to convince people that logic has nothing to do with irrational things like religion. That rational people cannot believe in absurd things like the soul, the spirit, Jesus or God.

They were both wrong.

Logic itself is absurd and irrational. Based on axioms selected arbitrarily, without any solid foundation whatsoever. The only thing we know for sure about any set of axiomatic theories – logic included – is that it cannot prove everything.

Life IS absurd and irrational. We exist without reason, we die without reason, we love and hate with no reason, we just Are. Any attempt to rationalize life will hit the wall of reality and collapse as soon as it started.

So believe what you want.

No you are not irrational.

Because there is no such thing as “rational”…

Frankenstein.

The story of Frankenstein is not just a horror story.

It is the story of a scientist who converses only with his own conscience.

And such a story can never have a happy ending.

In the midst of Romanticism, the era when the love for the “logical” and the “scientific” were at their heights, a woman saw through the fake illusions of grandeur and tried to warn us.

Do not practice science just for science.

Do not seek the limits without knowing your foundations.

Do not try to be god without understanding you are a human…

Nietzsche and irrationality as the only possible religion!

Nietzsche believed in the irrationality of life. Something which has led many people against religion. But on the same time many of these people accuse religion of being… irrational.

But can the meaning of life be rational?

Can the purpose of the cosmos be logical?

If we have to accept life as it is, like Nietzsche tells us, then we should embrace the illogical. Only then will we discover the deep darkness of the abyss. Where the only thing that makes things Be exists.

Faith…

Without explanations. Without foundations.

Pure. Irrational.

True.

Big Bang, universe, logical, illogical.

The big bang poses a big question: if it was indeed the cataclysm that blasted our universe into existence 13.7 billion years ago, what sparked it? Three Perimeter Institute researchers have a new idea about what might have come before the big bang.

The problem, as the authors see it, is that the big bang hypothesis has our relatively comprehensible, uniform, and predictable universe arising from the physics-destroying insanity of a singularity. It seems unlikely.

So perhaps something else happened. Perhaps our universe was never singular in the first place.

Their suggestion: our known universe could be the three-dimensional “wrapping” around a four-dimensional black hole’s event horizon. In this scenario, our universe burst into being when a star in a four-dimensional universe collapsed into a black hole. (1)

In order to keep our minds sane, we are willing to sacrifice everything in our path.

Why the universe should be “comprehensible”? Why the universe should be “normal” if its initial state was “abnormal”? Why do we still look for rules if the intiial state of the cosmos did not have any?

The doctrine of God seems illogical to many.
But so does love.
But so does the Big Bang theory.

Choose your theories wisely.
It seels that we live in an illogical world.
Trying to find logic in it is the only illogical thing…

Paley, Darwin, the interconnection of ideas, Truth…

William Paley is a 19th-century theologian best known today for his argument supporting intelligent design: Something as complex as a mechanical watch clearly would not exist without a creator. Thus we can infer that the intricacy of our bodies — and those of all creatures — is the work of God.

One might be surprised to find how close Paley came to anticipating Darwin. Here again is the passage from Paley’s “Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity”: As he contemplated the miracle of life, Paley proposed and then rejected the possibility that living organisms “are only so many out of the possible varieties and combinations of being, which the lapse of infinite ages has brought into existence; that the present world is the relict of that variety: millions of other bodily forms and other species having perished, being by the defect of their constitution incapable of preservation, or of continuance by generation”.

Darwin, as a student at Cambridge, was required to read Paley and expressed his own admiration for the man’s clear thinking. It seems that Paley was the inspiration for Darwin’s ideas about evolution. (1)

All ideas are interconnected.
What you think as illogical, is what someone else finds logical.
What you think as foolish, is what someone else finds clever.
Never be too judgmental with the ideas of.
You never know how they will turn back on you and hit you.

Defend your logic by leaving it defenseless.
Nothing true needs a defense.
It simply… Is.

And no. I have no “argument” about that. 😉

Exit mobile version
%%footer%%