“Ethics cannot be based upon our obligations toward [people], but they are complete and natural only when we feel this Reverence for Life and the desire to have compassion for and to help all creatures insofar as it is in our power. I think that this ethic will become more and more recognized because of its great naturalness and because it is the foundation of a true humanism toward which we must strive if our culture is to become truly ethical.”
~Albert Schweitzer
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Out of curiosity, would you call yourself a naturalist or an existentialist? You seem like you have beliefs of both.
Naturalism is a philosophical position that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes and laws. In its broadest and strongest sense, naturalism is the metaphysical position that "nature is all there is, and all basic truths are truths of nature. ...
Existentialist...A philosophical movement embracing the view that the suffering individual must create meaning in an unknowable, chaotic, and seemingly empty universe.
I guess the major point of difference betwen the two is that existentialism is believing the universe is unknowable? That is obviously not a very sound statement. We humans know quite a bit and learn more each day. I personally have a hunch that the universe is so complex and strange that we will never come close to understanding all of nature. But as a naturalist I believe nature or the natural is all there is. I do agree with the existentialist position that we make our meaning in our little corner of a chaotic, indifferent, mostly hostile to all life universe.
So in other words...both, like I figured. :)
Ever heard of the book The Universe Next Door? I'm reading it in Worldviews class this year. It's very interesting. ...It shows some of the holes in both naturalism and existentialism.
Not familiar with that book but sure envy you for getting to take a cool class like that! Sounds fun.
Post a Comment