The Atheist & the Foxhole
Catriona Hanley asks: Is God still dead?
Over and over and over again:
“Being for-itself (pour-soi) is the mode of existence of consciousness, consisting in its own activity and purposive nature; being in-itself (en-soi) is the self-sufficient, lumpy, contingent being of ordinary things.”
Whatever “for all practical purposes” given the same sets of circumstances experienced differently by each of us that actually means.
Then the part where genes give way to memes, nature to nurture. The part where sense perception gives way to mental constructs about ourselves in the world around us. A world no others experience in precisely the same way. The part then where scientists pass the baton over to the philosophers.
And that’s before we go out to the very end of the metaphysical limb and speculate about sim worlds, dream worlds and matrixes
Then the part where all of this is further recalculated given either a God or a No God world.
Here, however, construed by and large in intellectual contraptions that come down to earth only to focus in on the most banal examples of the behaviors we choose in the either/or world.
In other words, the part where common sense ends and philosophy begins. Not to mention the other way around.
But the bottom line still takes us back to God. An alleged omniscient and omnipotent God. Why? Because given His existence we have that transcending font able to establish the truth about everything and anything.
Sans God and what’s left [on this planet] is…us?