The Power and the Glory - by Burgess Laughlin

[RohinGupta]

The book is very well researched, brilliantly structured and extremely engaging.

It defines reason and mysticism, and deals with key crusaders on each side, as the Western civilization evolved,(Primarily from Greek ideas).

Each chapter revolves around the particular crusader, his social environment, essence of his ideas,their sources,evolution and maturity;plus method of communication.

More information about the book available here:

http://reasonversusmysticism.com/powerandglory.html

I dont think I am ready to comprehensively review the book,YET.

But here are the collection of a few integrations made as I read through. Hope this gives some indications on the nature of subject.

Some are directly related to the content,while others are from my previous knowledge,context of which was invoked by the content in the book.

Lesson derived from introductory chapter,where nature of Philosophy and its branches is described

"Now that I have ironed out inconsistencies in my Metaphysics and Epistemology,its time that I reintegrate these with Ethics."

While reading Celsus(2nd century AD) - Specifically, Formation of the concept of faith by Jesus, plus how it was translated from prior texts.

"Trust is not a type of faith.Former requires prior evaluation to bypass aspects of future evaluations."

While reading Porphery(3rd century AD) - Pagan Philosopher both attacks and arms his enemies.

"Rand-Peikoff,Plotinus-Porphyry.In both cases consistent but scattered works of former,integrated by latter."

While reading about Augustine(4th-5th century AD), I remembered about the term he coined, which meant that man is depraved by nature,ORIGINAL SIN.

"What a wretched view of man Augustine had! Not very different from Swaminathan Aiyer,contemporary Libertarian writer!!"

On reading Acquinas(13th century AD), I remembered the chapters I read in school on Renaissance.(Since Acquinas was instrumental in reintroducing Aristotle to the Western civilization).

"Renaissance,Enlightenment and Industrial revolution account for science and technology around.

Everything was covered within 1 chapter in my high school,and that too inaccurate."

On reading Kant's chapter,and how he divorced method of scientific knowledge, from the method of acquiring and applying Ethics.

"Assange,perfect example of Kant's fact-value dichotomy.Scientific knowledge driven by reason,ethics whimsical."

On reading about "We the Living",in the Ayn Rand chapter.

"Genius of ending in "We the living".Benovelence even WHILE the leading lady dies."

Looking forward to the day where I can review the book as a whole!!

[RohinGupta]

FYI,

The book mentions Ayn Rand as key crusader in reason, and essence of her life and ideas, in final chapter.

[softwareNerd]

I just started reading the book yesterday, completing the chapter on Celsus. The idea I found interesting is this: Celsus and the Christians both believe in God(s), and yet they have different approaches. The obvious question is: in what sense did Celsus not use faith, and yet believe in God? The answer is that his approach was to rationalize his belief (the way Locke did centuries later), while the Christian approach was to do away with even the need for rationalization. Since rationalization pays respect to reason -- i.e. assumes that reason is the the right epistemological approach -- Celsus's approach leaves open some room for rebuttal, whereas the Christian approach cuts it off.

[JayR]

+1 for starting this thread, I recieced the book yesterday as a gift. It will be a while before I can really delve in, but it looks fascinating. Its an examination of eight key debaters in the reason vs. faith debate throughout the ages.

A rundown of the chapters for those interested:

I. Celsus: A conservative pagan attacks Christian faith

II. Origen: A Christian teacher repels the pagan attacker

III. Porphyry: A pagan philosopher both attacks and arms his Christian enemies

IV. Augustine: A bishop armors faith with tradition, authority, and haltered reason

V. Thomas: A defender of both faith and reason debates two sides

VI. Locke: A political activist limits faith to make room for reason

VII. Kant: A philosophy professor limits reason to make room for faith

VIII. Rand: A philosophical novelist defends reason -objectively speaking

As you can see there appears to be a nice progression of ideas in the way he's formatted the book.