So, I think you can see that the difference between the views of Mr. Martino and those to which he objected, not as great as he points out, and even I it seems that the difference rather back the one that he sets. In short, the difference that Martino admits the existence of mysteries where the doctrine which he protects, does not recognize it. As for me, the meeting with Mr. Martino our disagreement with the materialistic explanation of the extremely shallow, I differ from Mr. Martino is only that he thinks found another the explanation of the phenomena, but I confess I can't find it. And while Martino he thinks he can understand the power manifested in things, I feel compelled to admit, after many attempts, I can't understand it. So before abstract a problem posed by the universe, Martino believes the human intellect is all-powerful, and I think him powerless. I think it's not the opposite view, as indicated by the article Martino. If we talk about "pride of science", it obviously came from pride of theology. I don't see humility in the belief that the human mind able to understand that the above evidence; I do not see special piety in the assertion that in the Universe, in nature there is no other higher existence, moreover, which we consider to be consciousness. On the contrary, I I believe it is possible to defend the position that more humility is in recognition of his inability to grasp the idea cause of all things and that the religious sense will find the highest expression in the belief that a Higher Power no more than can be presented in terms of human consciousness than within the functions of plants.
1 comment:
So, I think you can see that the difference between the views of Mr. Martino and
those to which he objected, not as great as he points out, and even I
it seems that the difference rather back the one that he sets. In short, the difference
that Martino admits the existence of mysteries where the doctrine which he
protects, does not recognize it. As for me, the meeting with Mr. Martino
our disagreement with the materialistic explanation of the extremely shallow,
I differ from Mr. Martino is only that he thinks found another
the explanation of the phenomena, but I confess I can't find it. And while Martino
he thinks he can understand the power manifested in things, I feel compelled
to admit, after many attempts, I can't understand it. So before
abstract a problem posed by the universe, Martino believes
the human intellect is all-powerful, and I think him powerless.
I think it's not the opposite view, as indicated by the article
Martino. If we talk about "pride of science", it obviously came from
pride of theology. I don't see humility in the belief that the human mind
able to understand that the above evidence; I do not see special
piety in the assertion that in the Universe, in nature there is no other higher
existence, moreover, which we consider to be consciousness. On the contrary, I
I believe it is possible to defend the position that more humility is
in recognition of his inability to grasp the idea cause of all things and that
the religious sense will find the highest expression in the belief that a Higher Power
no more than can be presented in terms of human consciousness than
within the functions of plants.
Post a Comment