Welcome to the Meeting of the Minute Minds, the annex to a prior series of discussions occurring between 2006-2008 that went by the same name. As the annex to this prior series, this forum will feature many of the same questions and themes as the original, as well as some of the specific content which those first discussions precipitated. Most of our discussions, then, will center around issues of faith, with primary attention being given to the question of whether the tenets of faith can be conciliated with principles of reason. Discussions of the past have featured such themes as the reliability of scripture, variant interpretations of the doctrine of faith, and the possible mechanics of conversing with God.
As the reader will no doubt recognize in the course of time, none of our contributors (at least presently) are experts on the topics we are discussing. However, the vast majority of us are highly sympathetic to the plight of the critically-minded to have their questions addressed in a manner that is intellectually satisfying. Therefore, though we might often in the course of our discussion fall well below the level of meticulousness that these subjects rightly warrant, we are nonetheless committed to the ideal of scholasticism, and will do our best to produce content that has at least appreciable intellectual merit. It is my hope that whatever ineptitudes we bring to the discussion do not serve to deter potential contributors from joining in, but rather encourage them to offer their own perhaps less-than-sophisticated thoughts and opinions on what is, admittedly, very complex and difficult subject matter.
Finally, in the process of browsing through the archives of past entries (particularly that content that is original to the first series), the reader will notice that prior discussions were largely motivated by a positive desire to defend the tenets of faith before the potential critiques of reason. This motivation, however, was largely a function of convictions which I no longer hold to the same degree. As such, though I might continue at times to proffer arguments in defense of faith, it is expressly not my intention to act as its guardian, and would be happy if future discussions featured a slightly more balanced representation of views. In short, the purposes of this present forum are NOT reflected in the bulk of its archived content (that is, occurring between the years 2007-2008), in which a distinctly pro-Christian bias pervades. I hope the tone of these prior discussions, which was merely an indication of the different goals I then held, does not too greatly burden our present discussions by obscuring the fact that it is driven by its own unique set of goals and motivations.
As the reader will no doubt recognize in the course of time, none of our contributors (at least presently) are experts on the topics we are discussing. However, the vast majority of us are highly sympathetic to the plight of the critically-minded to have their questions addressed in a manner that is intellectually satisfying. Therefore, though we might often in the course of our discussion fall well below the level of meticulousness that these subjects rightly warrant, we are nonetheless committed to the ideal of scholasticism, and will do our best to produce content that has at least appreciable intellectual merit. It is my hope that whatever ineptitudes we bring to the discussion do not serve to deter potential contributors from joining in, but rather encourage them to offer their own perhaps less-than-sophisticated thoughts and opinions on what is, admittedly, very complex and difficult subject matter.
Finally, in the process of browsing through the archives of past entries (particularly that content that is original to the first series), the reader will notice that prior discussions were largely motivated by a positive desire to defend the tenets of faith before the potential critiques of reason. This motivation, however, was largely a function of convictions which I no longer hold to the same degree. As such, though I might continue at times to proffer arguments in defense of faith, it is expressly not my intention to act as its guardian, and would be happy if future discussions featured a slightly more balanced representation of views. In short, the purposes of this present forum are NOT reflected in the bulk of its archived content (that is, occurring between the years 2007-2008), in which a distinctly pro-Christian bias pervades. I hope the tone of these prior discussions, which was merely an indication of the different goals I then held, does not too greatly burden our present discussions by obscuring the fact that it is driven by its own unique set of goals and motivations.
No comments:
Post a Comment