This is an open-comment theology blog where I will post various theological musings, mostly in sermon or essay form, for others to read and comment on. If what I say here interests you, you may want to check out some of my books. Feel free to criticize, to critique, to comment, but keep comments to the point and respectful. Many of these posts have been published elsewhere, but I wanted them collected and made available to a wider audience.
Usually MavPhil is quite clear with logic, this one doesn't flow.
You could look at the qualities man has over animals as proof of improvement and progress. I agree with MavPhil that if you actually see this wretchedness it is a religious perspective.
Yet using "thousands of years of collective experience" is tantamount to "because we've always thought so" which may or may not have any bearing on the truth of the matter.
Whether or not I agree with this one, it is simply a rather weak argument or set of arguments uncharacteristic of the rest of his work. Therefore I wonder at your calling it brilliant.
I think one can deduce man's wretchedness from history, given a certain disposition. A person with THAT disposition, looking at our history, INFERS wretchedness naturally. He "sees" it. That is what I gather Vallicella is saying.
Reinhold Niebuhr has something on wretchedness implying the divine image, I'll see if I have access to it. But mankind, by his choosing, I think can become something less than animal. We, by choosing evil, become less than the animal which may be cruel by instinct rather than choice.
Usually MavPhil is quite clear with logic, this one doesn't flow.
ReplyDeleteYou could look at the qualities man has over animals as proof of improvement and progress. I agree with MavPhil that if you actually see this wretchedness it is a religious perspective.
Yet using "thousands of years of collective experience" is tantamount to "because we've always thought so" which may or may not have any bearing on the truth of the matter.
Whether or not I agree with this one, it is simply a rather weak argument or set of arguments uncharacteristic of the rest of his work. Therefore I wonder at your calling it brilliant.
I think one can deduce man's wretchedness from history, given a certain disposition. A person with THAT disposition, looking at our history, INFERS wretchedness naturally. He "sees" it. That is what I gather Vallicella is saying.
ReplyDeleteReinhold Niebuhr has something on wretchedness implying the divine image, I'll see if I have access to it. But mankind, by his choosing, I think can become something less than animal. We, by choosing evil, become less than the animal which may be cruel by instinct rather than choice.
ReplyDelete"