Books and Fine Minds

"The reading of all good books is like a conversation with the finest minds of past centuries." - Rene Descartes

Benedictus (also called Baruch) Spinoza, exposed a flaw in Descartes' philosophy. Descartes revealed that an easy way to establish one's own existence is the famous Latin phrase, "Cogito Ergo Sum." I think therefore I am. It makes sense. If you can perceive your own thoughts then you know that you exist. Of course if you have sophisticated enough dreams you may be able to imagine that you are thinking and be aware of your thoughts. That would create a problem i.e., how do you know you are dreaming.

Nonetheless Descartes went on to say that because we humans can have an idea of God, that proves his (or her) existence too. That does not follow. And that is what Spinoza revealed after analyzing Descartes' philosophy. Which brings me to the above quote from Descartes. His aphorism is true if and only if all of the finest minds of past centuries wrote books. His statement is a kind of academic snobbery which is not uncommon among people with degrees. It exists to an extreme degree within those who have PhD.s and their attitudes toward persons with only MAs or BA degrees.

Many of us know people with very fine minds who do not write books. But also there are people who write books whose minds are not so fine.

That raises the issue of what makes a fine mind? Currently Barack "Barry" Obama is President of the United States. He has degrees from Columbia University in New York (BA), and a law degree from Harvard University (JD). He worships fine minds and credentials. But like so many people with fine minds and credentials he lacks common sense and integrity. Many people that he worships also lack common sense and integrity as well. So if these people with fine minds and credentials wrote books but they lack common sense and integrity, are these the kind of people with whom we want to have conversations?

Baruch Spinoza

Bruch (Benedictus) Spinoza
1646-1716

What Do You Mean When You Say God?

What Do You Mean When You Say God?


Kirsten Powers' review of "Fingerprints of God," by Barbara Bradley Hagerty
appeared in the New York Post, May 17, 2009, page 30. Few discussions of God define what the speakers mean by the word God. Those arguments lead nowhere.

Powers asks "Can science prove that God exists?" Depending upon the
definition of the word it can. God's existence can be proven without
much discussion. It requires defining what you mean by God. Under
Benedict Spinoza's definition, God is substance, or everything in the
universe, all that exists including man.

If you think of everything that man does not control, like weather,
gravity and other natural events, that can be defined as God. Thus
when you see gravity work that proves that God exists e.g., man does
not control gravity.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05172009/postopinion/postopbooks/fingerprints_of_god_169742.htm

or

http://tinyurl.com/r3kp2b


"FINGERPRINTS OF GOD" (Book Review)
FAITH FACTS
By KIRSTEN POWERS
New York Post
Posted: 4:37 am
May 17, 2009