Dormouse I have trouble reading your post, there are many very interesting sentences but what does it mean?
I was trying (unsuccessfully) to explain why the question of God's existence isn't really an important issue in philosophy.
As I previously noted, one cannot prove or disprove the existence or non-existence of God. This is categorical. Ergo, the question of God's existence is essentially moot from the perspective of philosophy.
You cast doubt of the existence of truth, you deny middle ground between god's existence and non-existence. You count philosophy as primarily concerned with truth, you say it only a love of wisdom.
Yes, philosophy is love of wisdom, not a search for truth.
The search for truth is essentially a search for religion.
And the definition of 'truth' is entirely religious since there is no basis for 'truth' existing beyond God's will. This is a key issue of epistemology.
You say one cannot seriously consider philosophy while holding a religion (Jesuits excepted), you say god was on the mind of many bright names. Any help understanding would be appreciated.
I didn't say that one cannot hold a religion and be a serious student of philosophy, only that this is particularlly challenging and difficult given the fact that having a 'strong religious view' means one already has chosen and is devoted to a particular and specific philosophy and that all other philosophical interpretations are wrong by definition.
Thus, most students (and professors) of philosophy in our modern world are 'non-religious' as either atheists or deists. Many religious types who do enter philosophy tend to see this as a conspiracy against their religion. I've seen this point made many, many times (usually made as an accusation of anti-religious conspiracy).
I think of a discussion on the existence of god in much the same light as natural disasters. If a flood is coming it is nice to convince people to evacuate, but if none is coming it is nice to talk them out of evacuating.
You are perhaps assuming that the question of God's existence is a valid one that can be answered.
Certainly if the question could be answered, then the question would be an important one, but since no answer is philosophically valid, the question becomes unimportant - it is just a matter of personal and subjective opinon, one way or the other. Some people find that interesting - but its not really philosophy.
I hope this clears up your questions. I was attempting to make several different arguments in my earlier post.
As a final point on this issue, I'd say that the real philosophical question that is most closely related to the question of God's existence is the question of epistemology - what is truth? That question certainly is a valid philosophical concern and any answer to that question tends to define the God-question. I of course have already stated that I fall on the relativist side of all questions of epistemology (as do almost all modern philosophers).
