SO TRUE IT HURTS!!!
2007-11-09 12:50:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by steveo_mcr 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Bertrand Russel was certainly an interesting character though I do think his atheism and those of the early Logical Positivist and Logical Empiricists was ill thought through. Ludwig Witgenstein was one of his students however they sort of went off track thinking that the only knowledge worthy of attention is scientific proof and all else is illogical noise. His colleague Alfred North Whitehead, with whom he attempted to produce a fully logical typographic number system of language, was rather different. Whitehead developed what is called Process Philosophy which unfortunately Christian Theologians have usurped though it is very original and interesting. There are non theistic Process Philosophers however who see the universe as an unfolding process of variable potentialities and not just a nihilist determinist automaton. Unfortunately, like most philosophers, its a but convoluted and full of obscure terminology. Whitehead and Russel produced a three tome volume called Principia Mathematica however the attempt to produce a fully logical mathematics of language failed due to paradoxes such as Russel's and Grelling's paradox (Look up paradox on Wicki) and Kurt Godel's formulation of his incompleteness theorem. I have to laugh when philosophers and scientist call people stupid because I think empiricists are stupefied by their own narrow arguments about determinism and the necessity for atheism. If everything is necessary in the universe the problem is to find out why people are confused not call them stupid simply because we don't have sufficient information to answer philosophical questions about being and becoming. I have touched on infinity before so wont go there. No one causes trouble, people just do the best they can given hereditary and socialized context. This does not mean we should not make value judgments and try to construct a better world. However I do agree with Russel that doubt and independent inquiry is the key to insight though I think Russel's dogmatic atheism does not sit well with doubt. Keep mind and heart open and rely on your direct experience. Its no good hoping that others will give you the answers If you continue to doubt and question eventually the answers will come when least expected. Our culture of instant gratification thinks that wisdom should be available in the market place. Sorry but it takes time, effort and a critical mind years to put the pieces together coherently. Nevertheless if you focus upon understanding Love, goodness, non-judgment and forgiveness the journey will be a hell of a lot shorter.
2007-11-09 15:33:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Stephen T 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Religion and oil are the biggest cause of conflict today.When the oil runs out the world economy will collapse as EVERYTHING is dependent on it. Religion is the joint top because certain countries want Islam to rule. Put it this way,if Iraq produced coffee there would be no war over there.
2007-11-09 12:57:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by simon g 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'd like to note that Bertrand Russell was very sure of himself.
2007-11-09 12:49:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by harlomcspears 3
·
5⤊
0⤋
If i make an A on an easy topic, and a F on a hard topic, then am I smart or Stupid. No one is stupid, they may have difficulties at some different topic than you but theyr'e probaly better at you than something else. God doesn't make people stupid in the brain, they do stupid acts that are called sins. "Smart people" doubt themselves because they don't want to be wrong.
2007-11-09 12:54:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by haley 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
If you look at it as being true, which way are you going to believe it. Because it says that stupid people are so sure about things and the intelligent are full of doubts.
Does that mean that atheists or Christians are stupid, because they both are so sure of their belief. Or are you saying that atheists have doubts about God, so that makes them intelligent?
2007-11-09 12:54:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by jenx 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Someone ( Oscar Wilde?) said "the difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." So did Bertie Russell's genius, whose statement I find only partly right. The first part of Russell's saying perfectly describes our beloved leader, but all of Wilde's words do.
2007-11-09 13:03:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why? Is it because stupid people don't think things over unlike intelligent folks they analyse even the smallest details, they weigh things the advantages and disadvantages of things.
2007-11-09 12:52:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by ontan 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think that Bertrand Russell is lacking insight.
2007-11-09 12:50:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by bobalo9 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
No... not really. Intelligent people would not doubt themselves. Bertrand, try one of the more common ones: Poverty, AIDS, Drugs, Crime, etc.
2007-11-09 12:52:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Religion is the biggest cause of all the trouble in the world, be cause those stupid people are so sure about them self, and the intelligent folks let them belief their silly things.
2007-11-09 12:51:28
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋