Do poly atheists know the Bible?

[kentonio]

Great poems are great because they tell deeper truths. That's the point of poetry - to get at truths that cannot be sufficiently expressed by prose.

Shame people don't treat the bible as an allegorical work then instead of literally believing all that crazy bull**** about supernatural gods, virgin births and suicide by centurion.

[Imran Siddiqui]

People treat a lot of Scripture as allegorical. However, allegories are usually based upon things that actually occurred.

[kentonio]

You're reaching.

[Ban Kenobi]

Great poems are great because they tell deeper truths. That's the point of poetry - to get at truths that cannot be sufficiently expressed by prose.

A good poem can express a "truth" well without that thing actually being true. It's an expression of whatever the author wants to express. If the author's opinion is garbage, the poem is garbage dressed up in aesthetically pleasing literary devices. You can think "The Charge of the Light Brigade" is a good poem without viewing military service as admirable.

[kentonio]

I'm also willing to place some serious bets on The Rime of the Ancient Mariner not actually being a description of real events. Call me crazy if you will..

[Imran Siddiqui]

A good poem can express a "truth" well without that thing actually being true. It's an expression of whatever the author wants to express. If the author's opinion is garbage, the poem is garbage dressed up in aesthetically pleasing literary devices. You can think "The Charge of the Light Brigade" is a good poem without viewing military service as admirable.

And if you think the author's opinion is a wonderful meditation on faith and God, then you will embrace it. However, most people won't be praising the hilltops a poem (or song for that matter) in which they believe the author's opinion is repulsive.

[kentonio]

Why would we give a rats ass about the moral opinion of a 19th century poet?

[Ban Kenobi]

And if you think the author's opinion is a wonderful meditation on faith and God, then you will embrace it. However, most people won't be praising the hilltops a poem (or song for that matter) in which they believe the author's opinion is repulsive.

If viewing a poem as "good" is contingent on agreeing with its message, I don't understand why you would cite Tennyson as proof it's a great poem. If he liked it, according to you he must have agreed with it. Tennyson can only be considered an authority on how to write poetry well. The author of Job was a talented writer, but he's still a nutcase who worships a sadistic god.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Kentonio: We should definitely give a rat's ass about the opinion of one of the greatest poets of all time upon another poem.

Furthermore, do you toss out the moral evolution of humanity with every age to re-decide what morals are? This may be the first time I've said this (but you've heard it), but this time I may ask "What kind of conservative are you?!"

[Imran Siddiqui]

If viewing a poem as "good" is contingent on agreeing with its message, I don't understand why you would cite Tennyson as proof it's a great poem. If he liked it, according to you he must have agreed with it. Tennyson can only be considered an authority on how to write poetry well. The author of Job was a talented writer, but he's still a nutcase who worships a sadistic god.

a -> b does not mean b -> a.

And your opinion is clear, as is mine. I don't love the Book of Job any less because you would consider me a nutcase.

[Ban Kenobi]

a -> b does not mean b -> a.

And your opinion is clear, as is mine. I don't love the Book of Job any less because you would consider me a nutcase.

What 'a' and 'b' are you talking about?

[Kidlicious]

Physical objects are what produce humans in the first place.




Why would I want to get a basic philosophy education when I can just say my views are obviously true and win every argument?

At one time physical objects didn't.

Anyway your argument is suitable. I believe that things like love are more e than just thoughts and feelings.

[kentonio]

Kentonio: We should definitely give a rat's ass about the opinion of one of the greatest poets of all time upon another poem.

His opinion on whether it's a good poem sure, but as it's allegorical (and as we've pointed out allegorical poems are not in any way by definition based on real events), I still don't get your point.

Furthermore, do you toss out the moral evolution of humanity with every age to re-decide what morals are?

Toss out? No, but certainly expect that the morals of someone living in the 19th century are streets apart from the morality we expect today. Or should we conveniently forget about little things like slavery, oppression of minorities and women etc?

This may be the first time I've said this (but you've heard it), but this time I may ask "What kind of conservative are you?!"

Cool story Ben.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What 'a' and 'b' are you talking about?

Praising a good poem because you agree with the message does not mean your agreement with a poem means that you think it is a good poem.

For a contra example - I may enjoy Robin Thicke's "Blurred Lines", but I'm not going to be praising it because I think the message is abhorrent.

I will praise a song that I like and I think the message is a decent one. However, that doesn't mean that if I think the message of a song is good, I'm going to think that the song itself is good (ie, most Christian praise music).

[Imran Siddiqui]

His opinion on whether it's a good poem sure, but as it's allegorical (and as we've pointed out allegorical poems are not in any way by definition based on real events), I still don't get your point.

It depends on the intent of the writer...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory

Medieval thinking accepted allegory as having a reality underlying any rhetorical or fictional uses.

In many works of Jewish writing, the allegory was on top of a real event.

Toss out? No, but certainly expect that the morals of someone living in the 19th century are streets apart from the morality we expect today. Or should we conveniently forget about little things like slavery, oppression of minorities and women etc?

You mean things that people of Faith helped to end (*ahem* William Wilberforce)? One cannot understand the morality of today without realizing the morality of the past - and one cannot uncontextualize people in the past. Everyone before 1900 isn't a moral monster.