h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Classical Theism - A686045
Author: Roadkill (ACE) - Sexy in a nonsexual way again - U185550

I'd like to submit A686045 for review.

I really enjoyed this

Very well written, clear, though provoking and engaging

One small thing, I think that the final paragraph might be clarified a little. The Wittgensteinian objection against classical theism is directed at their attempt to provide a definition of the *essence* of God - i.e. a definition of "God" that would be abstracted from any and all of the particular language games in which the word "God" is ordinarily used. It is this aspect of the classical theist project that is in danger of distorting the meaning of the word into nonesense - not the difficulty of debate between competing religious views.

It is not impossible, I think, under the Wittgensteinian view, for debate to occur between believers of different religions or between believers and non-believers. 'Outsiders' can always learn the rules of a new language game - just as we can become invovled in any practice.

Thank you. Just to check if I understand (and I'm not sure I do), your objection is that the Wittgensteinian objection to classical theism cannot is: the way the word God is used is so contorted by classical theism/ religious language, and is in danger of rendering talk about Him into nonsense?

er... Dr Funderlik?


Looks like a well-written entry, so well-written that even I understand it

However, I think the entry could benefit from setting it off against A898680, A472033 and perhaps some other entries found when searching h2g2 for 'God'



Bossel

Thank you, Sir Bossel for your comments. I have exams coming up in RL right now, so I may not be able to update for a while, though, having said that, I may use hootoo as a form of release. Basically, I'm not sure .

*smacks own head with large plank of wood*

My apologies Roadkill. This just dropped right off the end of my conversations list for some reason (namely my own stupidity), and I only just found it again..

As to your question
<>

Answer: Yes, but contorted by classical theism - not necessarily by all religious language. Why classical theism? Because that is an attempt to take the word define it as abstractly as possible. For Wittgenstein, words have their home and their proper meanings only within the complex langauge games of which they are a part. They are like nodes with many meanings and uses trailing away from them. By trying to reduce and clarify the meaning of the word "God", the classical theist is, according to Wittgenstein, actually removing all proper meaning from the word. So they are using it in a way that is nonesensical.

Phew... hope that helps. I think this is an excellent entry, and I hope that your exams don't delay you too much in coming back to it.

Thank you again.

June 6th is the date of the last one, so in the worst case scenario, it'll be then. Thanks for your comments, when I do manage to do something I'll post something.

Right, okay, the worst case scenario was slightly worse than envisaged. In any case, there have been some updates made. I hope I've dealt with Wittgenstein satisfactorily- I didn't really understand the objection before. I'm still not sure I do. In any case, comments etc are welcome.

Hello?

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Excellent, thanks.

Congratulations Roadkill!

Thank you.