Imperfect Adherence

11 Oct

Both Matt Yglesias and Young MZ see Coulter’s comments about “perfecting Jews” as the unsurprising response of a Christian who sees her faith as the one true faith, and that expressing disdain misses the exclusionary nature of sincere religious adherence. In response, I’ll point to djw at Lawyers, Guns, and Money, who accurately sums up my thoughts on the matter:

I think this post exemplifies a problem analytic philosophy types discussing religion. The fact is, squishy liberal religious people, who exist in very large numbers, exhibit an set of beliefs and justifications that wouldn’t stand up in the seminar room. Their epistemology might be described as flabby, lazy, incoherent. But really, that’s ok. Ecumenicalism can be defended on political grounds quite well, but it harder to defend as a coherent and logical worldview.

Advertisements

One Response to “Imperfect Adherence”

  1. Matt Zeitlin October 11, 2007 at 8:28 pm #

    This won’t work on me, Corey, “analytic philosophy type” is a compliment. Hell, hopefully by this time in three years (so the beginning-ish of my junior year in college) I will be an official analytic philosophy type, not just an aspiring one.

    But all kidding aside, I think there’s a perfectly coherent, defensible Christian world view that doesn’t defend, say, biblical literalism.

    Except in the case of Christianity, the idea that they’re like Jews but better is on the same level as accepting Christ as the Messiah. In fact…it is the same thing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: