Hmmmm....."Am I sure?" Pretty sure...but a good question to ask, yes?
Here's something funny. The day before you posted the reply that includes the sentence below, I read the following sentence and said to myself, "I must look up this word "noumenal." (Yes, I'd say I'm a beginner in a lot of ways today.) "Looking deeply into the phenomenological world, we touch the true nature, the noumenal world." "And all phenomena are manifestations of the noumenon (a thing as it is in itself, as distinct from a thing as it is knowable by the senses through phenomenal attributes). So ultimately "the real thing" transcends phenomena. ~s3raphita Things like that happen all the time here for me. I'll ask a question silently and suddenly a topic will address it somehow. I don't really believe it, so I just keep testing! Ha. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <s3raphita@...> wrote : Re "The Buddhist idea of Dependent Co-Arising, which is a philosophy that would allow for the concept of infinite regression to exist": Intriguing suggestion. Never thought of that. You sure you're a novice? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : These Crash Courses are good at instructing the ignorant masses. At about 8:15 in, he states that Aquinas takes it as a given that everything must have a cause other than itself, and that therefore, his argument of God as "first cause" is self-defeating because why wouldn't "God" have to abide by the same "rules." I thought that was one of the deals with theism - no "God" doesn't abide by the same "rules" as his creation. I don't try to talk intelligently about any of this because I'm such a novice, but just read the Buddhist idea of Dependent Co-Arising, which is a philosophy that would allow for the concept of infinite regression to exist, in theory. Seems to get down to the age-old discussion of dualistic vs non-dualistic view/approach. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <yifuxero@...> wrote : The Cosmological arguments of Aquinas. Also discusses flaws and counterarguments. Aquinas basically examines causes and effects, saying that if one traces origins backwards, there can't be an infinite regress. But on the contrary, that could be a false presumption on his part. Aquinas and the Cosmological Arguments: Crash Course Philosophy #10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgisehuGOyY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgisehuGOyY Aquinas and the Cosmological Arguments: Crash Course P... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgisehuGOyY Our unit on the philosophy of religion and the existence of god continues with Thomas Aquinas. Today, we consider his first four arguments: the cosmological ... View on www.youtube.com https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgisehuGOyY Preview by Yahoo
