I came across this Blog a while back and a very interesting comment by a very interesting Dr Leong, maybe Nick or some of his friends can tell us if they have heard about The Agoroa because it is apparently Singapore based… This is my reply to teh Comment by Dr Leong, which youc an read here
I’m very impressed by Dr Leong’s very excelent argument for the existence of God, but as in my philosophical readings, I find the same problem with his argument as I find with many others, God appears to be a leap of faith.
Whilst I find the philosophical cosmological argument most convincing, there is certainly nothing in any of the arguments (Paley, Anselm, Acquinas, Descarte, Pascal etc) or the good Doctors own discussion above give any credence to a Christian God or any particular type of God for that matter.
Sorry to make this a matter for the existence of God, I was actually more interested in the use of post-modernity and modernity in your religous discussions and wondered if the Dr Leong has considered Nietzsche’s Genealogy of morals in its full extent? I’m sure you probably have, but at no stage do discuss the ramifications of arguably the father of post-modernism’s clear disgust with the christian morality and its hypocrisy.
I guess the reasons for this are similar to Hume’s disregard for the fact that he considers that we essentialy do not exist! As the Doctor said: “postmodernism is practically unlivable”… why not bring God into the argument – because all God represents then is an excuse, God becomes by definition really ‘that which we cannot explain.’
This to me is an equally unlivable and untenable philospohy to live life by, so please excuse me while I go join Hume and play cards and enjoy my life in what you may label a very unchristian, unreligous, and selfish ‘post-modern’ way.
Whislt you suggest that I cannot live life how I wish and may discuss Foucault and consider whether the way i wish to live is really the way I wish to live or if it is just societies way of wanting me to live, the argument applies equally well to religion; are you living your life how your religion wishes you to live it, or jsut how society wishes you to think your religion wants you to live… Confusing hey. Foucault has to be at least slightly mad, but he has a point, and he would defintely argue that mad is not necessarily a bad or unintelligible thing.
Thanks for reading! No offense intended.