Kauffman and ‘God’ concept
15.02.09 at 3:29 pm ·
I have been harsh towards Kauffman, but I think he deserves credit for trying to rescue the “God” concept from the Judeo-Christian baggage (for some reason Spinoza didn’t succeed here). Nobody would care if the non-anthropomorphic philosophical concept of the Greeks, Plotinus, etc. had won the day.
If Spinoza didn’t succeed, Kauffman won’t either.
Spinoza is a highly attractive thinker or perspective in the current science/religion confusion, but the confusion travels with the word ‘god’, whatever its usage. And the much maligned Christians at least had a sense of the devil, however confused that is! Don’t get me wrong, I am being partly ironic.
But the god of ‘spinoza’ wil always include the devil, that is an extraordinary blind side to occultism will arise in a Spinozistic science.
In any case, Kauffman’s gesture deserves its moment, you are right, but it will suffer the original fate of Spinozism, witness its fate in the Pantheism debate, in the work of Kant, and then of Hegel.
It always gets snafued.
Anyway, who wants to get religion (‘reinventing the sacred’) from these scientists. They understand nothing and will create even worse confusion than the Christians.
At least Christians have a built in memory and lore of the kind of evil occultism explored on this blog.
Reinventing the sacred can only be done by those who grasp this insidious hidden component to religions like Christianity and Islam.
More to say here, and think about.