>Right on target, Glenn. This is all too reminiscent of the medieval
>Muslim philosopher Averroes who maintained that "truths of reason" and
>"truths of faith" existed in two logic-tight compartments, so he could
>"save" both his Aristotelian natural scuence and his faith based on the
>Qur'an. Thomas Aquinas opposed Averroism and argued strongly for the
>unity of truth, and I don't see how he could be wrong about this. The
>laws of logic apply accross the board, and if a statement of faith is the
>contradictory of a statement of reason, one of them must be true and the
>other false. To say they are both true in their own way is to open a
>pandora's box which, if recent history is our guide, will result in
>people denying the Resurrection and still claiming to be Christians; or
>affirming that all religions are equally truthful even though Christians
>affirm the uniqueness of Christ; etc. The fact that any particular
>person adopting an Averroistic dualism of truth doesn't go that far
>doesn't mean that such extremes are not the logical end of such a denial
>of the unity of truth.
>
Thank you for the kind words and re-education about Averroes from a mostly
forgotten and aborted philosophy graduate education.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm