Essential Qualities of Personhood

[Michael]

It is simply not the case that if the available evidence is insufficient to resolve the question about which of two contrary props is true when both props have good independent evidence for being true, then it’s tantamout to commiting intellectual suicide to say to one’s self, “I can’t at present resolve this…”

It would be intellectual sucide without the qualifier “at present.”

Do the best you can, and when you’re faced with contrary positions which you cannot resolve, then live in the tension while looking for more evidence and better arguments.

That’s the purpose of philosophy, to stretch our minds, ask questions, and look for answers (even when they’re only barely perceptible.)

I’ve been trying to do that here, and if I’ve been frustrated with you, it’s because you so often said things like “that answer isn’t conceivible to me,” or “the question just isn’t important to me.”

Whatever rational reasons you had for saying things like that (and this is my attempt at an apology here), if I had just accepted those comments, this discussion would have come to a dead end.

As it is, it’s been very helpful to me, and I hope to you (and maybe even others reading along.)

I want to thank you for the contributions you made (and particularly for sharing that email from Prof. Zimmerman, because I find his thoughts very interesting, and they do offer me an “answer” I find at least “barely perceptible.”)

Thank you Tom.

[Michael]

I found this very interesting.

closertotruth.com/video-prof … orne-/1078

Polkinghorn is a former Professor of Mathematical Physics at Cambridge, and an Anglican Priest.

In some ways, he agrees with process theology (in that he sees God existing within time), but he also believes there’s “a timeless charecter to God”" (He simultaneously exists outside of time.)

This seems (to me) very close to what William Lane Craig was trying to say.