[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 44 KB, 738x307, Screenshot 2021-09-03 095937.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18974482 No.18974482 [Reply] [Original]

Should Catholics read things that challenge their worldview?

>> No.18974490

I don't see the issue here? What are you trying to say

>> No.18974505

>>18974482
No, no one should unless they are highly competent. People already know what's true and reading false resources makes you stray away from the truth. In other words, never read leftist literature or modern books. Read only sacred texts and ancient literature. You won't miss out on anything of value. I fell for the meme to read outside of my worldview and it's inevitably a waste of time because we fundamentally differ on our first principles. Mine are correct, everyone else's are wrong.

>> No.18974506

>>18974482
>should X read things that challenge their worldview?
I mean, I guess it depends on the meta structure senpai. Though I do feel like If I was part of a particular denomination, I wouldnt make my 7 year old read polemics from the veriety of world veiws off hand, I think thats how you create a schizo. I would give them a firm standing on one, then allow a more implicit exploration of others later. But again, I think there is both a decent argument for a level of direction, as well as a level of exploration.

>> No.18974528

>>18974482
yes everyone should the goal isn't to have (x) worldview the goal is to be working towards what you see as the strongest worldview you can't have a strong worldview if it can't be continually challenged

>> No.18974544

Consider the intelligence and emotional maturity of the average redditor.

>> No.18974604

The idea that you have to read things which challenge your understanding of the world is a fundamentally modern liberal phenomenon. If traditional Catholics are really traditional, then no, they don’t need to do that.

>> No.18974613

>>18974505
>first principle
way to repeat yourself retard. "princeps" means first in latin, principle means "the first" so you just said "first first".

>> No.18974624

>>18974613
Poor logic. Worldviews come from within and changing your worldview just because you're not able to refute sophistry would make a person unable to maintain any worldview just because they're not clever enough to build a refutation to something they internally know to be false.
>>18974613
There can be secondary principles derived from first principles. You don't understand language.

>> No.18974761

>>18974482
Yes. You made a screenshot of an idiot who forgot that list of books meant the Vatican had most of the copies of the work in existence hoarded. You asked a question which a six year old child should be capable of answering.

>> No.18974800

*burp* God's not real Morty.

Also fuck off back to r*ddit.

>> No.18974901

>>18974482
Only if you're a brainlet. Catholics should be challenging and strengthening their faith. If you accept God as a priori, then using what intellectual abilities you have to search for truth about the world ought to make that stronger, not weaker.

But most people are dilettantes who read like one book a year and aren't capable of putting it in dialog with other texts.

>>18974505
Honestly true. I've read a pretty significant amount of far left literature. Didn't really enjoy it and found it pretty morally incomprehensible.

>> No.18974915
File: 111 KB, 638x578, 1620652806033.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18974915

>>18974482
reddit has that logic about anything

>> No.18974918

>>18974901
Pretty based. As far as reading outside of your world view/reading leftist literature, you should read some of the foundational leftist literature to know what's out there and the rough contours of the ideas, but beyond that there isn't a need to read more unless something in it interests you in some particular way,

>> No.18974920
File: 433 KB, 1200x758, christian pepe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18974920

A reminder the Grace of God is a gift freely given.
You cannot buy it. You cannot ask your priest or pope for it.

>> No.18974921

>>18974482
The Pope is a Catholic and he's infallible. That's all you need to know.

>> No.18974922

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_authors_and_works_on_the_Index_Librorum_Prohibitorum

What the fuck kind of logic is there to this list? Pensees was banned?

>> No.18974945

>>18974505
Based. Although I think becoming familiar with these heretical texts can be of use if you are into conversion. It's good to btfo people every once in awhile because every so often someone will turn to Christ in the face of Truth.

>> No.18974956

No. If you know the truth, why would you entertain anyone saying the opposite? That would be how the devil gets in. I'm sure I read this somewhere in some churchey book, or perhaps Plato, but discussion is dangerous. To discuss something is to treat both sides as equally deserving of being heard. But if you are a good Catholic and know the truth, why would you entertain dangerous falsehoods? They should be silenced, for the good of society, not given a platform to poison souls.

I'm not Catholic myself btw I have no religion. I have no dog in this fight.

>> No.18974968

>>18974918
What are the foundational texts? Robespierre's diaries? It's not really an intellectually rich tradition.

>> No.18974975

>>18974505
You're not going to get any more competent by hiding your head in the sand. Peter says always be ready to give a good answer. Unless you verse yourself in the apologia of other religions, that's going to be practically impossible. You will have times when you are challenged and doubtful; the greater faith is to trust that God will lead you through this through further learning regardless.

>> No.18974982

>>18974613
Princeps is not the same word as principle you cossal retard

>> No.18974985

>>18974915
>Oh no I've done a thought crime sorry my fellow redditors I must leave this place!

What subreddit is that ?

>> No.18974991

>>18974918
I agree. That's pretty much what I did. I went through Marx and Rousseau and then some of the New Left and really contemporary stuff like David Harvey. Eventually realized while reading David Graeber that it no longer had any value for me and I was becoming increasingly annoyed with the left-wing stylistic idiosyncrasies like Randomly Capitalizing Words and trying to apply dialectical analysis to the Star Trek franchise. I enjoy reading different perspectives but after a certain point there's no reason to keep reading stuff that's based on premises you are aware of and reject.

>> No.18974992

>>18974956
To expand on this a little more...to avoid sin, you avoid the setting. If you spend your days with smokers, drug addicts, prostitutes, atheists, robbers and degenerates, you would be exposed to sin and in danger of sinning yourself. A smart person would remove themselves from the opportunity to sin. If you want to lose weight, for instance, you would not have a pantry full of cake that you forbid yourself to touch.

>> No.18974998

>>18974920
You have to choose to accept it, and certain Fathers say that grace needn't precede a desire to turn to God necessarily.

>> No.18975009

>>18974992
>To expand on this a little more...to avoid sin, you avoid the setting.
Jesus ministered to tax collectors, lepers and the poor. Your argument is beyond flawed. See >>18974975

>> No.18975014

>>18974991
How is Rousseau a leftist? I read the Social Contract and his political theory would be considered fascistic today. There was virtually no overlap with today's leftism and hardly any with the French revolutionaries.

>> No.18975024

actual reddit screenshot for a thread. this place is shit

>> No.18975030

>>18974921
A pope has only invoked infallibility once.

>> No.18975031
File: 512 KB, 857x751, Discourse on Inequality.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18975031

>>18975014
Read the Discourse on Inequality.

>> No.18975033

>>18974922
>Sartre
>de Beauvoir
>Hume
>Zola
>Comte
>Locke
>Milton
>Descartes
Based. All of these should he banned

>> No.18975039

>>18975014
As a short-hand, Rousseau's writings in a large part begat the Romantic movement, which eventually and through several iterations/steps evolved into and deeply influenced 19th and 20th century leftist thought. There's a lot to go into, but you might want to read Isaiah Berlin's "The Roots of Romanticism" which is relatively short but covers this pretty well and fairly.

>> No.18975046

>>18975039
Romanticism influenced right wing thought even more a

>> No.18975052

>>18975009
>Do not be deceived: “Bad company corrupts good morals.” 1 Corinthians 15:33
>“I have made a covenant with my eyes; how then could I gaze at a virgin?” Job 31:1
>“whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” Phil 4:8
>"Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them." Romans 16:17
>"Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry." 1 Corinthians 10:14
>"He who walks with wise men will be wise, But the companion of fools will suffer harm." Proverbs 13:20

I could post more but this link is enough https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Bad-Company

It's just common sense to avoid the circumstances of sin.

>> No.18975064

>>18974482
Only Catholics have this problem. Considering their apologetics consist of nothing but "Were right because we say we are and we are older" it is no wonder that the weakest Protestant apologetical works are enough to demoralize them.

>> No.18975103

>>18974482
that's genuinely funny. imagine being afraid of inquiry. some "faith" you got

>> No.18975122

>>18975039
>>18975046
It influenced everything that came after. It was a movement born out of nationalist fervor and yearning that the people had for a new unified identity.

>> No.18975141

>>18974985
>What subreddit is that ?
/parlerwatch/

>> No.18975146

>>18974482
Like the Bible?

>> No.18975188

>>18975146
Got 'em

>> No.18975193

>>18974915
This is beyond parody, I dont eve understand how redditors exist

>> No.18975198
File: 27 KB, 706x249, 1628168725233.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18975198

>>18975193
>This is beyond parody, I dont eve understand how redditors exist

>> No.18975207

>>18975009
Not everyone is a ‘doctor’ like Jesus was towards sinners. Best to avoid it in most circumstances, see >>18975052

>> No.18975222

>>18975052
This is has nothing whatsoever to do with apologetics, but with criminality and vice. There is a difference between being actively sinful and passively misguided. You should avoid being friends with the first whilst looking to help the latter. If you want to help the latter, you must learn to recognise and point out the errors in the texts and speeches that have lead them improperly.

>> No.18975229

>>18975198
Well that's just bizarre. Sneed has never been any sort of slur not even in a troll sense like the OK hand sign.

>> No.18975230

>>18975207
The main thing is that you need to know yourself, and if you are weak against one type of sin, you should avoid the circumstances around it. Example: I have no issues working with violent people or drug addicts or hateful/spiteful people, and by approaching them with generosity I can sometimes help them overcome their problems. However, I have a hard time resisting lust and sex, so I stay away from circumstances where I might let myself be seduced. We all must be good to each other, but to be good to each other we need to recognize that some circumstances are more likely to make us cause harm than others. Those circumstances will be different for all of us.

>> No.18975395

>>18974482
No, for the most part. People are easily manipulated, misled, and propagandized.
Catholicism is a fundamentally traditional religion, its followers recognize an authority higher than themselves and their own faulty reason

>> No.18975424

>>18974482
I'm still waiting for anyone to explain how that's any different from COVID-related censorship.

>> No.18975443

>>18974482
>Dear fellow Catholics, do not attempt to read

>> No.18975447

>>18975198
s-word

>> No.18975479

>>18974482
If they want to remain Catholic? No. Otherwise yes. For me, it was reading Kant that deconverted me.

>> No.18975731

Any theologian here?
Did you read `atheist` books at the university?

>> No.18975760

>>18974482
Should we read about Chinese medicine before going to the hospital? Should scientists learn about Flat Earth before doing astronomy?

>> No.18976073

>>18974482
>redditfag
>cant live outside his echochamber

>> No.18976176

>>18974482
why yes *tips fedora* the marketplace of ideas and blah blah blah and isnt it so cool how we can just calmly and rationally have this debate while also maintaining mutual respect and circlejerk about how rational we are and so on

idk i just dont care about OPs topic i find it boring

>> No.18976280

>>18974922
nietzsche not being on there is remarkable. maybe they had largely given up by then

>> No.18976477

>>18974956
You did not read this in Plato

>> No.18976518

>>18976477
Maybe not. Wish I could remember where I read it.

>> No.18976536

>>18974482
No, they should kill themselves. Only cure.

>> No.18976548

thinking for yourself will always be the primary enemy of religion

>> No.18976569

>>18974613
shitty bait

>> No.18976577

>>18976280
>While individual books continued to be forbidden, the last edition of the Index to be published appeared in 1948. This 20th[35] edition contained 4,000 titles censored for various reasons: heresy, moral deficiency, sexual explicitness, and so on. That some atheists, such as Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, were not included was due to the general (Tridentine) rule that heretical works (i.e., works that contradict Catholic dogma) are ipso facto forbidden

I mean, does the Ch*rch really needs to specify that you cannot read a book named "Antichrist" ?

>> No.18976690

>>18975198
Obvious fake. You can say nigger and it still has to be manually removed.
>>18975229
>>18975447
Use your brains.

>> No.18976696

>>18976690
i dont post on reddit

>> No.18976710

>>18976577
Oh so they leave atheist books out of their banned books list because all atheist books are banned? Kind of weird but keeps the list shorter I guess

>> No.18976725

>>18974482
You know, every shit in the western world, including the demise of one said people, would have been avoided if people ignored mentally ill retards who needed so much to challenge everything and call for a superior moral ground, now is too late

>> No.18976729

>>18976710
For similar reasons, I am technically excommunicated (latae sententiae/ipso facto) but officially still counted as a Catholic. I'll probably tell them sooner or later, but I fucking hate bureaucracy, and I probably need my 2nd nationality ID card more than getting "un-baptized"