#wilc

What you speak of now as “destiny” is only the overlap or sometimes may be conflict of the consequences of the choice you’ve made when you were given the chance to choose.

In our discussion about Rationalism and Rene Descartes’ Methodic Doubt, we hit the point wherein he reached the idea of perfection. Being fully aware that he is not perfect, he questioned his ability of coming up with the idea of someone who is perfect - someone who defines perfection. He thought that his imperfect mind can’t conceive a perfect image so he thought maybe this perfect image was fed to him by a supreme being who is perfect. The one people call now as God.

Though we didn’t fully discuss the length of the Philosophy of Religion, enough questions were raised asking about the validity of his argument. One is, “how did that idea travel from the Supreme Being’s head to his?” It was proposed that the Supreme Being may only be a part of his mind, a piece of his ideas, and may not be real.

We also discussed the characteristics of a Supreme Being - omnipotence, omnibenevolence, omniscience, etc. Wherein another question was raised: where do you place evil in the image if your God is all powerful, and all good?

Nevertheless, this discussion made me believe again. The logic may be a little bit questionable but seeing a logical discourse (not all biblical discourses) on this one gives me hope. How I wish I can still take that Philosophy of Religion course.

This is what the Socratic Method is all about and not “You respond, and I put you down because your response is not in line with mine.”