Philosophy of Religion

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Because a smily will make everything all right. Just like preceding insults by saying "With all due respect,..."

[JP Dogberry]

Reminds me of another philosophical situation...

One man is stranded on a Desert Island by himself. He believes himself to be Napoleon. There's noone to disagree, being on a desert island, so by popular opinion this man *is* Napoleon.

Then another man ends up on the island, who believes our friend isn't in fact Napoleon. Since there's one person viewing either way, now it's puresly a matter of opinion wheather he is or is not Napoleon. No fact about it, just opinion.

Now, if "Napoleon" is, according to the newcomer, eaten by a crocodile, the question is, is "Napoleon " in any position to disagree about being eaten by said crocadile?

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

well, he'll be Napolean, but will he be the Napolean we all refer to when we generally say that name? No. He won't. Popular opinion does NOT change that reality. There's no solid philosophical basis for that in a universe that is describable.

And a man is only eaten by a crocodile when he's been eaten by a crocodile.

[fuzzyoctopus]

Does the crocodile think the first man is Napoleon?

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

that depends on whether the two men believe the alligator is capable of credulity.

[fuzzyoctopus]

Wait, where'd the alligator come from? Did the crocodile become an alligator when both men had their backs turned?

[GorgonlaVacaTremendo]

I'd like to point out that there is a difference beyween popular opinion and fact, so his being Napoleon in the first place was purely opinion.  At the point in time that the first man was consumed by the Crocodile, which you expressed as fact, then yes, the man was consumed.  And the so-called Napoleon is in no position to argue with fact, alive or dead...

And on a side note does he think he is Napolean Boneparte or some other Napoleon, as Napoleon is a name used more than once in history...

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I'd like to point out that there is a difference beyween popular opinion and fact, so his being Napoleon in the first place was purely opinion.

<advocate type="devil's">So you're saying all names are just opinion? Very well, in my opinion, your name is "Mud"</advocate>

[fuzzyoctopus]

I agree. My opinion is also that your name is Mud.

Names are fickle things.  We only think they're permanent because the govt registers us and gives us all a number so they can keep track of who and where we are.

[Spriggan]

and right now the goverment knows your on to them, fuzzy, so you'd better watch your back.

[Entsuropi]

In the case of 'net geeks like me, we then add another name and start getting terribly confused over which one to use in any given situation.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

just to stir up problems, here's another volley in the believing is making: http://www.criticalmiss.com/issue6/soulthought1.html

[fuzzyoctopus]

*amused look*

Now you're just being silly.

"There is no absolute truth. If everyone except you believes something to be true then it is, and they are right, and you are wrong. "

Until your girlfriend gets pregnant.  Which means that it isn't true after all.

*rolls eyes at the entire male species*

[fuzzyoctopus]

And going back to literature, I think I've finally found a school of theory I can put my support behind.
Reader-Response Criticism

http://www.cnr.edu/home/bmcmanus/readercrit.html

Too bad I know if I used this on my paper my teacher would probably fail me.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I'm suspicious of reader response. Isn't it essentially saying that the only thing that matters is the reaction of hte reader to the text?