I Think, Therefore I Am

[@cornerstonechurchpca8027]

Dr. Sproul’s knowledge of philosophy and the way he breaks it down so everyone can understand always astounds me.

[@jessyjonas4988]

"There is a way that seem right to man but the end is death." Proverbs 14:12✝️

[@fredcourtney03]

I love the lecture series and sermons on this KZbin channel. The internet is far too often used for the enemy and his purposes. It is great to see it used to promote the word of God. I am but a poor wretched creation in his site. Praise Jesus

[@jessyjonas4988]

We have no excuse for not knowing God. He has clearly revealed Himself as Creator, Ruler, and Controller of the world. When we accept and come into relationship with God only then can we find and know ourselves.

[@jessyjonas4988]

Jesus said to him, " because you have seen you believe, BLESSED ARE THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SEEN AND HAVE BELIEVED." John 20:29✝️ There is no need to doubt to see Holy Scriptures declare BELIEVE THEN YOU SHALL SEE

[@jessyjonas4988]

" ...so that they should seek the Lord in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and have our being.." Acts 17:27-28✝️ We simply bow to the Holy Scriptures that tells us who we are

[@The_True_]

That moment in which you consider that some ancient philosophers were rather insane. But then, apart from the grace of God, who isn't rather insane?

[@yashikamaini8643]

Awesome! I must salute this man! He is an excellent teacher with exceptional teaching skills

[@Iamprimadonna]

I am , therefore I can think because there are other intelligence beside interlect/logic. But yes that is one way to show that you are existing.

[@itsdavidstube]

The problem with Descartes is he is playing what amounts to a ridiculous philosophical game since the opposite is also true. It is not that he (Descartes) is not not thinking but the reality is that at the same time he is acting in ways that make thinking possible. He cannot stop acting in ways that are instrumental to the capacity to engage in the kind of thinking that is necessary to actions that make survival possible. We could just as easily say, "I act therefore I am." "I cannot stop acting therefore I must be." "I am thrown in the middle of the lake that is life and I cannot stop the act of swimming without drowning." Metaphorically, all life is remaining on the surface of the water. Even while I can temporarily pause certain actions there are just as many other actions that I cannot stop even if I never focus on what I don't do. Even while he (the philosopher) engages in a game of doubting he is breathing, eating, defecating, keeping sheltered and warm (or dry), and a thousand other things and all of those also require a considerable amount of thinking and planning. At no time when there is acting is there also not thinking. Sometimes acting requires a more sophisticated kind of thinking, with planning and coordinating and checking the consequences of that kind of thinking and that kind of acting, where reacting, and then reacting again, and correcting, makes for a different kind of doubting. This is the kind of doubting that doubts whether we have doubted the right things in the right way at the right time in making correction for our last action that will improve our chances that our next action will be more successful that our last action. And the concern is not only how successful was our last action in relation our next action but also (like a chess board with a thousand lines of squares in every direction) how the consequences of the actions now will be realized 10,000 actions later. Philosophical thinking in the form Descartes describes is based on the luxury of doubting, as if doubting exists in isolation. As if doubting is the first thing in isolation. It is not that doubting is not important but believing is just as important because acting is important to life itself. Sophisticated doubting that Descartes describes is based on thousands of invisible things, not only the most "mundane" things like the either or of breathe in breath out, right hand or left, stand or fall, edible or not, all of which provide the basis for what comes next on the level of sophistication (but which never stops entirely because it is embedded in what comes later). The philosophy of doubting presumes that language has been learned, that logic has been taught, that the concept of opposition is acquired, that the concept of necessary is understood, each of which are necessary conditions (but not in and of themselves sufficient conditions) of any epistemology that can include doubting. Lack of acquiring the minimum level of complexity is the problem. While acting is requires more acting that acting is never guaranteed to be successful. Success, however limited, does not happen in an pure sphere anymore than the opposite. Philosophy presumes the existence (to some degree) of a mature adult who has the intellectual capacity to think the thoughts necessary to arrive at those conclusions. "Cogito ergo sum" requires a host of necessarily presuppositions and cannot exist in isolation from learning in action, experiencing hands-on training, and acquiring common sense (which is more uncommon than common). Too much philosophical thinking assumes a perfect isolated space where we can "reason" about the world without at the same time performing "successful" actions in the world. Its like the supposition that we can stop breathing all the while we can contemplate deeply about breathing. We cannot separate ourselves from the world as pure observers without acting in certain ways (that maintain life) within the world. It is not that thinking is any less important but thinking and acting are two sides of the same coin. The problem with Descartes logical rendition is that even if everything is true after that is accomplished then what? What is the next indubitable step? What is the next step after that since we know that not only will we have to make a lot of more decisions but we will be making them until we die? Paradoxically, knowing what we cannot doubt anymore is considerably less useful than knowing which actions are necessary and which are not. What is really useful are those actions that are unavoidable and undeniable. At some point we can just as easily arrive at Descartes desired conclusion from totally different ways and none of them in the abstract. To my thinking, that is not only where interesting philosophical speculation really begins but it is the relevant to the problems of life.

[@santosconcepcion9616]

The problem with that conclusion is that you still dont have God. When you start with man, youwill have absurdly and a vicious circular circle. How does he know he is? He can still be a brain in a vat. God is the only ultimate precondition for intelligibility. God is therefore man thinks and has being.

[@mauimudpup]

Descartes went into why God has to exist too, This is a short bit

[@jeremyjohnson4106]

Thanks for this

[@santosconcepcion9616]

@mauimudpup still its conclusion is from man's reasoning and to that one may say "So what"

[@nidamurtaza4622]

Write speech on this topic

[@elcioeverton8679]

🙌🏼🥰

[@daveporter7178]

But that's a fallacy, as the conclusion is found within the premise. Otherwise it should be "there is thinking going on" not, (I) think. We do not reason to God. God alone provides justification for the validity for our ability to reason.

[@TheEPICskwock]

The idea that doubting God is inherently wrong is also a fallacy. If you believe the notion that everything happens according to God's plan, then you must also believe that people doubting God was part of God's plan. So to get upset that people doubt God is to get upset at God for giving people the ability to doubt God. To accept that not everybody will believe in God is to accept the inherient truth of reality that God created. To shun those who doubt God is in itself doubting God.

[@Andrew-dg7qm]

So much thinking. Jesus said the kingdom of heaven is at hand, and he’s right. Stop thinking and just be

[@santosconcepcion9616]

The

[@arposcl3music903]

The

[@How_to_viral605]

The

[@caelinchristante4021]

I don't trust theological authority. I only trust biblical authority

[@stephaniew.9366]

God is not the author of confusion but of peace.

[@caelinchristante4021]

@Rubes Ruiz Mark 7:7 ESV - in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

[@caelinchristante4021]

@@stephaniew.9366 correct however man is. Matthew 15:9 ESV - in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

[@caelinchristante4021]

God put the same warning in scripture twice. He's telling us to pay heed to this warning

[@caelinchristante4021]

@Rubes Ruiz even the "great" apostle Paul was a biblically weak male. He was wrong about some things

[@steveobrien3673]

So ignorant …