4 ms·
That argument came from C.S. Lewis, and the primary counter I know is that it assumes "lunatic" is a binary condition -- someone is either delusional or not. We
by ebiester 12y ago
That argument came from C.S. Lewis, and the primary counter I know is that it assumes "lunatic" is a binary condition -- someone is either delusional or not. We, today, know that this isn't the case. There are people who have truly bizarre beliefs that don't otherwise hinder logical functioning.
- gress 12y agoBy 'people', I presume you mean all of us.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- xivzgrev 12y agoThen wouldn't that person be a liar? All and all Jesus said he was the Lord. So I think it is actually rather tight - he was correct, he was incorrect and aware of it (liar), or he was incorrect and not aware of it (lunatic).
- fsiefken 12y agoThat is assuming the rendition and interpretation of his words concerning him being the Lord in the gospels written decades after his death on the cross are correct. Perhaps he was merely a charismatic wisdom teacher. Even so there is a field of study (transpersonal psychology) where mystical experiences are not necessarily seen as deviant and a sign of disease. So the mystical union with the Godhead might not necessarily be lunacy. Perhaps this got understood by the leading intellectuals in the mythological imagery we have concerning Christ and it's meaning for humanity as the platonic Man.