Why is it that in philosphy there is no one who will just give you pros and cons of a philosophical argument?
My teacher takes great delight in glossing over the arguments against, and yet expends great energy dropping books saying “That book has been dropped. I dropped it. It has not dropped itself.” and that illustrates the cosmological argument dear readers. Unfortunately the response I would dearly love to give is “Yes Miss, I can see that.” except then she expound about how this proves the a posteriori point to the argument! I know I attend a Catholic sixth form, but for the love of God we need to know how to argue philosphy, it does not matter if it turns people away from Catholocism because at least they have reasoned it out properly instead of responding to “peer pressure”.
Having attempted to do my Paley’s Watch argument homework, I have only found websites that give me “Paley’s argument is full of faults…” or “Paley’s argument proves existence of God, end of…” Before anyone has the bright idea oh just use them both, too late I had it myself and found that some things that are considered proved by scripture on one website and then on another its actually a serious fault.
Why, why why? To what end and purpose is it that the internet should be this way? Why can’t someone be wonderful and give the argument objectively? Is it so hard to do that, because actually in English you have to be objective to the articles you analyse and whilst its actually annoying, I can guarantee it is not difficult.
P.S. I am sorry if I became a little sour at the end, I’m drinking a lemsip. And Gwen you can delete this if you want to, I just wanted a rant without anybody reasoning with me.