[lbo-talk] Post- philosophy philosophers

[Carl G. Estabrook]

Here's the best account I know of the question that Holt (and a good number of other modern philosophers) raises. It's from the late Oxford philosopher/theologian Herbert McCabe (Terry Eagleton's teacher).

http://newsfromneptune.com/2010/08/14/god-and-creation/

"In my view to assert that God exists is to claim the right and need to
carry on an activity, to be engaged in research, and I think this throws
light on what we are doing if we try to prove the existence of God. To
prove the existence of God is to prove that some questions still need
asking, that the world poses these questions for us.

"To prove the existence of God, then, would be rather like proving the
validity of science — I don’t mean science as a body of established facts
set out in textbooks or journals, but science as an intellectual activity,
the activity of research currently going on; and not just routine research
which consists in looking for the answers to clearly formulated questions
by means of clearly established techniques, but the research which is the
growing point of science, the venture into the unknown..."

On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:26 AM, c b <cb31450 at gmail.com> wrote:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/books/review/why-does-the-world-exist-by-jim-holt.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2
>