Ah, I like this categorization. But I think I disagree.
-
-
Replying to @micahtredding @vgr
Breath of God isn't defined in the sense you're thinking. These are experiential categories.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @micahtredding
I'm talking generally about that kind of allegory. In hinduism it is the primordial sound (nad brahma) for eg
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Haven't read, but sounds beautiful. You take it as a primarily ontological claim?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @micahtredding
in general steelman views of religion = best understood as consciousness ontologies. Everything else breaks with skepticism
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
This is probably our core disagreement: To me, “soul” is an experiential claim. The experience is what the ancients really *meant*.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @micahtredding @vgr
It's only our society that reads “soul” as metaphysics.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @micahtredding @vgr
There are modern theologies, like Mormonism, that explicitly associate souls with matter -- not supernatural metaphysics
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @LincolnCannon @micahtredding
they still have notions of revealed scripture etc which no atheist would accept as defensible claims
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
Right. I don't think theists and atheists necessarily have any disagreement over nature of the soul. It's a misunderstanding at best.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I think there's a deep, unbridegeable divide and you're just in denial that you've turned effectively atheist bwahahaha 
-
-
Replying to @vgr
Hahaha. Maybe. Or maybe religion has always been an engineering problem. :)
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.