Michael Rea - Analytic Theology

What happens when deep questions of God are addressed by the precise methods of analytic philosophy? It’s not about “proving” the existence of God. It is about clarifying the attributes and doctrines of God. So why is analytic theology controversial?



Michael Rea is Rev. John A. O’Brien Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Center for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Notre Dame.


Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[michaelwu]

I think this person made perfect sense. What is everyone complaining about?

[dennistucker]

Another great video from CTT. Before this video, I'd never heard of analytic theology.

[bajajones]

Michael van de pol. BINGO! This man took ten minutes and said absolutely nothing. However, this man takes saying nothing to new highs.

[hazardousmaterials]

For someone who puts a priority on clarity, Rea sure made his argument as obfuscating as possible. He also said analytical theology avoids “decorative metaphors, ” then immediately used analytical philosophy as a metaphor for it.

[jeffamos]

Analytic CATology ? Don’t analyze talking to your cat and thinking you’re having a conversation

[ricklanders]

Why privilege "clarity?" Logic is a human invention. And who is to say what is "clear" and what isn't? Even the most apparently clear statement is fraught with problematic incompleteness, absence, and lack - just like an infamous deity we're all familiar with! It would seem that to understand a theological "god" we would be better off being contradictory, opaque, and obscure.

[michelvandepol]

'Analytic Theology' is talking for 10 minute and say absolutely nothing that makes sense

[irfanmehmud]

Surely Analytical theology is great for insomnia.

[gatorgityergranny]

stop saying “Right.?”
you are asking no one to concur.
you do not wait for an answer.
it is merely an insecure elbow to my ribs
and says “i am very unsure and want to herd you into my argument, ”
right?

[Paxsali]

I'm more interested in Quantum Theology, because it sounds cooler to me.

[xspotbox]

How to analyze faith immediately after a tragic accident when people are still under a lot of emotional stress, definitely very hard if you were personally related to a dead person. But if things are not that personal, sure people can talk about event, specially if they're all part of same church community. Tragedies are worst tests of faith, thing can became serious and fatal very quickly. It's hard to be prepared for this things and stay rational at same time, actually best is not to be rational at all because emotions must flow. Human yes, but rational, ... first thing people think about is how can God allow that evil happenings. Since God is never guilty, but he is the cause of all emotions, something dark and sinister crawl into minds of community. And it doesn't want to go away, no matter how people try to rationalize events.
Best explanation is probably, God doesn't exist and tragedy didn't happen because of supernatural influences, leave explaining of causes to professionals and silently remove yourself from crowd, so psychology can take it's course and slowly contemplate new aspect of reality. Except talking about tragedy after thoughts and emotions settle down is not quite the same thing, people forget their emotional states and reason from their current emotional perspective.
Analytical theology should demand some level of education and field experience from participants, i think, not everybody understand human psyche and control over self well enough to tackle darkest mysteries of life. It's essential to study phenomena like that sinister presence i mentioned before, those are powerful emotions and can distort mentality permanently. Church must resist to mass hysteria and must follow own customs, since people in community are like family and shouldn't keep secrets from each other, but also can't ignore government laws, procesures and regulations. How is religion different from general citizenship, it seems all humans are equal in tragedy and death, regardless of causes and meanings, except theology doesn't end with death of a man. There must be a process how we go from material, temporal and personal to spiritual, eternal and universal.

[georgecorrea]

Essentially theological babble and philosophical shenanigans.

[Ascendlocal]

Next up..."Analytic My Pillow", which has the same outcome. $100 for instant cervical stenosis. Make sense...cents...since...?

[Ploskkky]

"So why is analytic theology controversial?"
Because there is nothing to analyze. The only thing these people do is talking about fantasies.
I am a fan of analytic smurfology myself, especially on the topic of their blueness, and the cuteness of their little white hats.

[michaelp]

Hard to clearly grasp what this guy is trying to explain.

[andrebrown]

This sounds like another way of arguing a god into existence.

[borderlands]

Analytic theology sounds like biblical literalism gone mad. Approaching a text in the same way you'd isolate a protein from its surroundings. Reductionism and ultimately atheism grew from exactly this bizarre approach to reality. It's the same mindset, focus on one thing to the exclusion of others, pretend the investigator is meeting the problem objectively and without context, and allow the answer to extrapolate into all similar conclusions. Intelligent design was never very intelligent, but this is materialism meets the numinous.

[publiusovidius]

"What they ought to do sensibly in the wake of it (their grief)"? That's easy. They should abandon it and adapt to reality instead of taking refuge in mythologies and philosophical rationalizations of those mythologies.

[firstnamesurname]

Today, I decided to become a Polytheist ... I believe in Peter Pan, I believe in "The Force ", I believe in ALL the Gods that were/are/will be named ... I believe in No God, I believe in The Multiverse, I believe in The String Theory Landscape, I believe in Mathematics, I believe in Myself, I believe in The Lie, I believe in SelfDeception ...

Unfortunately, The Truth isn't constrained by My omnipotent human will to believe in whatever I want to believe ...

But at least, I am Not a naive believer wanting to believe that his beliefs and intellectual ruminations are "closer to Truth" ...

... For The Truth, to believe is Absolutely not Required ...