The primary function of this blog is to compile thoughts from the variety of literature I read. As a person who reads a fair amount of fiction, contemporary analytic philosophy (primarily in the field of the Philosophy of Religion), theology (primarily in the field of Christian Ethics), as well as having a decent canon of existential and continental writings, it may be wise to find a location to write my thoughts in an analytic fashion – a location of clarity and concise construction. Personal journals and notebooks include my stream of consciousness thought, and this is entirely appropriate. The function of this blog is not to produce those kinds of thoughts.
The purpose of this blog is for me write occasional posts that concern what I reading in the classes I take at Seattle Pacific University, along with whatever reading I do on the side. For example, I will be reading Medieval philosophy next quarter, and I'm curious how this will change how I think about God and reason. I will also be reading David Bentley Hart's The Experience of God along with a friend of mine who does not believe in the God as declared to exist by the Jewish/Christian/Islamic faiths. I am curious as to how this experience – the reading of the text and the discussion of the text with a close non-Christian friend – will raise new questions about God and how I will address them. My intended purpose for this blog is to have a place in which I can clear confused thoughts and questions – Is there a God, exclusivism vs. pluralism, what are the metaphysical traits of God, etc – that I have and will surely encounter again in my readings, along with newer questions raised by new texts I read and the context they are read in.
I'm wrapping up a contemporary epistemology course with a paper concerning Plantinga's argument that belief in God is (or, perhaps more appropriately, can be) properly basic. I am curious as to how my perspective on this issue will change after I read more of St. Thomas Aquinas, a person who certainly did not hold that belief in God was properly basic. In this blog, I can hold the two arguments side by side. I don't know where I fall, but I want to explore the options intelligently – what are the consequences of claiming belief in God is properly basic? How does, if at all, does this help the Christian epistemically? Having a location to put these thoughts – the arguments and the appeal to them – seems to be beneficial in striving towards clarity within a puzzled mind. I hope to find some sort of clarity when I post, whether it be in summarizing philosophical arguments, reviewing a novel, or simply cleaning thoughts and trying to find where to go next in my thinking.
This blog is not for anyone's particular pleasure but my own. However, I am making it available for others to read, for I have friends that share interests with me and can offer insights and wisdom that would go unexamined by me if it was not for them. For these people I am very thankful Life offers many big questions that one cannot examine purely by oneself with a few critical texts in hand.
– Samuel.
P.S. The title of the blog is a Wittgenstein reference, as my close friends would undoubtedly guess. My copy of the Investigations is currently sitting on my desk, and I can think of no title perhaps more appropriate for this blog.
