Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    When public reason cannot resolve a question, individuals... — Carmelics
    Home/Free Will & Foreknowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Whether Abraham was legitimately obeying God or was a deluded would-be murderer must be decided as a matter of individual religious faith

    When public reason cannot resolve a question, individuals must decide for themselves

    Democracy & GovernanceFree Will & Foreknowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Free Will & ForeknowledgeDemocracy & Governance

    Connections

    1 topic

    Religious Experience2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Free Will & Foreknowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Public reason cannot decide whether Abraham's act was legitimate obedience to Go...Whether Abraham was legitimately obeying God or was a deluded would-be murderer ...

    Similar

    Practical reason can decide what to believe when theoretical reason ca...79%A reason is public only if it is compatible with the motivational set ...77%Enoch (2015) raises this challenge against public reason approaches.74%If a reason determines that one outcome obtains, the alternatives lack...71%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: kierkegaard
    View source passageHide passage
    From Kierkegaard’s religious perspective, however, the conceptual distinction between good and evil is ultimately dependent not on social norms but on God. Therefore it is possible, as Johannes de Silentio argues was the case for Abraham (the father of faith), that God demand a suspension of the ethical (in the sense of the socially prescribed norms). This is still ethical in the second sense, since ultimately God’s definition of the distinction between good and evil outranks any human society’s

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective