English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2 answers

Many would say they are different, either because they wanted to protect the religious notion of divinity or transcendence from certain kinds of philosophical claims that would seem to diminish or reduce religous transcendence, or (from the philosophy side of things) because they wanted to protect a philosophical principle of transcendence from some sort of otherworldly, religious idea of transcendence that operates outside the realm of the human, or the proveable.

Personally, I think truth is truth is truth; that is, I don't think transcendence needs protecting, from either perspective.

2006-09-24 14:10:01 · answer #1 · answered by k. 1 · 0 0

i believe its different

2006-09-24 17:48:56 · answer #2 · answered by kelleyandjohn2000 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers