Spiritual Data: Christian Philosophy

This is a breakdown of my philosophy glossary, focused on indicating what is possible to be true in light of Christianity.

The angle here is to assume that all things are possible, unless there’s a materially significant conflict with Christian doctrine.

  • If God’s desire is to draw people from all walks of life, then that will encompass all forms of philosophy, so it would be close-minded to assume more specific values than what is legitimately possible.
  • It is reasonable to assume, however, that any population of mature Christians will invariably develop a narrower scope of belief over time.

This is, therefore, less of a clear picture of what is correct, and more of a clear image of what can be believed within the legitimate body of Christ.

  • Anything “True” is literally essential to being a Christian.
  • Absolutely anything “Possible” can coexist with the Christian faith (especially when they’re new believers), though some of them can legitimately damage a person’s relationship with God (even if it doesn’t outright destroy it).
  • Anything “False” is literally impossible to harmonize with the Christian faith.

Metaphysics: How many parts is reality made of?

Since we are distinctly not God, but God has distinctly made the universe and everything in it, then all Christian metaphysics must necessarily be dualism across reality.

  • Cartesianism/Substance dualism can’t exist strictly, since there are enough Bible verses to indicate that the a person is composed of the collective whole that incorporates both their mind and body (e.g., flesh/spirit battle expressed in Romans 7:15).
  • Epiphenomenalism isn’t possible, since the very universe itself was corrupted by our severed ties between us and God (which is arguably a mental experience more than a physical one).
  • Mentalism is, by Christian theology, necessarily true, since at least some part of our minds are part of our souls, which live on past this life while our brains will decay with the rest of our bodies.
  • Realism is also necessarily true, at least regarding our perspective. However, if we argue that God’s perspective is what holds the universe together, then acosmism is true according to God’s perspective, and realism would therefore be incorrect.
    • Given that our hearts are thoroughly deceitful, and that we shouldn’t lean on our understanding, Naïve/Direct/Perceptual/Common-sense realism (and its polar opposite sensualism) can’t be true.

However, monism and pluralism could certainly exist within the universe as a subset of dualism.

  • Monism evokes many feelings to associate everything with everything else.
    • Dynamism is certainly possible if the connections between matter are inseparable from matter itself (e.g., quantum superstates).
    • Idealism is entirely possible, especially if we define the universe as something created for a relationship with God.
      • German idealism is possible to believe if we assume our minds develop a type of “commentary” on what we perceive.
      • Objective idealism is possible, but only if we assert that the perception of God defines what exists. Some theologies of hell, however, make this impossible (since it’d be God’s non-perception).
      • Subjective idealism can’t be true, since our minds and God’s mind are intrinsically separate things that certainly both exist.
    • Materialism (and its derivatives in dialectical materialism, historical materialism, naturalism, and physicalism) isn’t possible in Christian doctrine, since there is a lot of Scripture revolving around the concept of a “spirit” state that transcends a physical one.
      • In particular, Christian materialism, despite its name, requires indicating that only Jesus exists, and we are illusions, which takes away from any meaningful relationship God would have with us.
      • Physicalism’s variants (eliminative materialism, emergent materialism, French materialism, reductionism, and revisionary mateirialism) are abiding by science’s latest trends, but don’t hold up if we assume that God is a spirit being of any form.
  • Pluralism is also entirely possible if we believe that some things are designed to transcend human understanding.
    • Holism and organicism has plenty of use. An example would be how the Church with all its members together is more value than each individual within the Church.
    • At the same time, reductionism (and ontological reductionism) is also significant in its place. After all, as a thought experiment, Jesus would still have died for one single human being.

The Verdict

True

  • Dualism
    • Mentalism

Possible (and useful)

  • Pluralism (if some things are designed to transcend human understanding)
    • Holism
    • Organicism
    • Reductionism
      • Ontological reductionism

Possible (somewhat)

  • Acosmism (if God’s perspective holds the universe together)
  • Realism (likely)
  • Monism (as a subset)
    • Dynamism (if matter and its connections are inseparable)
    • Idealism (if we conclude the universe was created for a relationship with God)
      • German idealism (since our perceptions are a “commentary” on what exists)
      • Objective idealism (if we assert that God defines what exists)

False

  • Some forms of dualism
    • Substance dualism
    • Epiphenomenalism
    • Common-sense realism
    • Sensualism
  • Monism (as a superset)
    • Subjective idealism
    • Materialism (and all subsets)

Metaphysics: Does reality exist?

There is no way that God’s standard of justice is relative, so absolutism is undeniably true and relativism is undeniably false.

  • Further, our beliefs about God’s omniscience almost mandate a further belief in necessitarianism (since God doesn’t technically perceive “possibility”, even though we do).

The very real nature of sin and our implicit need for a Savior makes severe constraints on reality:

  • Accidentalism isn’t possible, since cause-and-effect is a very real thing.
  • Nominalism can’t be true because the truth of sin requires there to be an objective reality associated with a moral failing.
    • However, conceptualism is still possible, especially if we lean into idealism.
  • Illusionism can’t be true, since God creates actual, tangible things.
  • Immaterialism can’t be true either, since there are material, real consequences that we face as a consequence of material, real decisions we have made.

Eternalism is certainly partly true, at least with reference to God. Our beliefs about what God knows and how long He has known it will affect how far it goes.

Philosophical presentism also has a tremendous amount of possibility, since the past is simply memories and the future is simply imagination.

The Verdict

True

  • Absolutism

Possible (and useful)

  • Eternalism (with respect to God)
  • Philosophical presentism

Possible (somewhat)

  • Conceptualism

False

  • Accidentalism
  • Nominalism
  • Illusionism
  • Immaterialism

Metaphysics: What is reality made of?

Anti-realism is necessarily true in some part, since God knows what we don’t, and we can’t fully know God’s plans.

  • Modal realism is also at least somewhat true, given how much value God gives regarding keeping our minds and hearts pure.

Atomism is hard to not be true, since God has a cumulative design structure that uses many small things to make bigger things (e.g., protons/neutrons/electrons for all matter, neurons for all brains).

  • The extremes, though, of Buddhist atomism and Greek atomism can’t be true, since there’s a clearly sustaining nature to atoms, but they were certainly created by God at some time in the past and will some time in the future cease to exist.

Constructivism certainly has merit, since our minds have constraints on what we can perceive.

Determinism is necessarily true in some way, since God has designed everything and knows what will happen.

  • Hereditarianism is very possible, and likely true, especially when we consider that Scripture indicates aspects such as curses passing across generations (Exodus 34:7).
  • Finalism is, in some ways, a vastly meaningful perspective within Christianity, since Jesus will eventually create a right solution to all failings within society.
  • However, subsets of determinism like biologism, historical determinism, and historicism can’t be true, since our decisions are inalienably our responsibility and God is always capable of intervening to change the course of events.
  • On a smaller scale, though, indeterminism is also possible, since misfortune happens evenly to both righteous and sinners (Matthew 5:45).

Emanationism is a necessary Christian principle, since God literally made everything in the first place.

  • While occasionalism can exist, it can’t be complete because we would then have to conclude that God caused us to sin, which is not true (James 1:13).
  • Ontologism is also entirely possible within Christian theology, and there is Scripture to back it (Romans 1:20).

Essentialism is entirely possible, but only if we believe beyond a certain amount of order.

Hylozoism is potentially possible, but it’s a stretch. It would require defining souls as physical things (and not merely spiritual).

  • However, vitalism has a high likelihood to be true, since our souls aren’t a scientifically measurable thing.
  • Panpsychism may have truth, depending how it’s defined and what we qualify as having a “mind”.

Physicalism and mechanism can’t be true, since God is spirit (John 4:24).

Intrinsicism can sit alongside Christian theology, especially since we were thoughts of God before we became physical beings (Psalm 139:13-16).

  • Even Platonism is possible if we assume that the forms of the universe are contained within God’s mind, though there can’t be any “goodness” inherent to the forms relative to their physical expressions.

Optimism is the only reliable Christian way to see this universe (e.g., Liebniz’ “best of all possible worlds”), and necessitates that pessimism can’t be true in any grand scope.

Voluntarism is profoundly true if we believe God literally designed the universe for our relationship with Him (which places our wills into a higher value than we’d otherwise imagine).

The Verdict

True

  • Determinism
    • Hereditarianism
    • Finalism
  • Emanationism

Possible (and useful)

  • Atomism (since God designed everything from smaller components)
  • Anti-realism (since God has hidden plans)
    • Modal realism (since God cares so much about how we see things in our minds)
  • Constructivism (since our minds have constraints on what we can perceive)
  • Essentialism
  • Indeterminism (at a small scale)
  • Intrinsicism (since we were God’s “thoughts” first)
  • Ontologism
  • Optimism (in general)

Possible (somewhat)

  • Platonism (if the “form” isn’t inherently superior to the form’s reflection)
  • Vitalism (since our souls aren’t scientifically measurable)
  • Voluntarism (if our wills are the reason for the universe’s existence)

Possible (but difficult)

  • Hylozoism
  • Panpsychism
  • Pessimism (on a small scale)

False

  • Atomism (at its extremes)
    • Buddhist atomism
    • Greek atomism
  • Determinism (in some forms)
    • Biologism
    • Historical determinism
    • Historicism
  • Occasionalism
  • Physicalism
    • Mechanism

Metaphysics: Who runs reality?

Animism can be entirely true, but any spiritual authority will be subordinate to God’s authority.

While anti-theism is somewhat true, nontheism simply can’t be true if Christianity holds truth.

  • Agnosticism (and its subsets, and the hybrid of transtheism) are untrue, since the God of the Bible is certainly knowable with distinctive qualities.
  • Atheism (and its subsets) are untrue, since there obviously is a God.
  • Further, hybrids and derivatives like Agnostic atheism and Ignosticism can’t be true either.
  • While it isn’t direct, Darwinism is very difficult to harmonize with Christianity and requires plenty of symbolic associations to come to that conclusion.

Christianity is essentially and indisputably a subset of theism.

  • In particular, it’s vastly and non-negotiably monotheism.
    • Augustinianism is definitely true, since the dichotomy of spiritual and physical does not have an implicit goodness or badness (i.e., there are spiritual demons and angels, there are physical sinners and physical Jesus Christ as sinless).
    • Classical theism is at least somewhat true, but the essence of Jesus makes it impossible to go all the way with the idea (since He wants a friendship with us and is therefore affected by our lives and decisions by extension).
    • Deism can’t be true, since God has a clearly vested interest in humanity’s decisions and development.
    • Since God is clearly distinct from the universe, pantheism, panentheism, pandeism, monistic theism can’t be true.
    • Substance monotheism is necessary in some form as a necessary basis of understanding the Trinity.
  • Christianity also necessitates creationism, with the universe being a clear product of God’s design.
    • Young Earth creationism is the only logical conclusion without incorporating modern scientific trends.
      • It’s even possible to believe the more radical Omphalos creationism.
    • Theistic evolution (and its neighbors Old Earth creationism and gap creationism) requires merging with Darwinism, and is difficult to logically validate.
  • While philosophical theism is possible for a Christian, it’s a very shaky ground because it implies that one can find salvation without God’s divine revelation (which simply can’t happen by merely observing nature).
  • Polytheism is not true, at least with respect to the universe’s creation.
    • However, it is possible to fully believe monolatry as a Christian, though henotheism (and its subset kathenotheism) go too far with the idea.
  • Substantialism is also possible, since God made everything.

The Verdict

True

  • Theism (generally)
    • Augustinian theism
    • Substance monotheism
  • Creationism

Possible (and useful)

  • Creationism (in a few forms)
    • Young Earth creationism (driven by either scientific beliefs or the Bible directly)
    • Omphalos creationism (which effectively throws out scientific beliefs)

Possible (somewhat)

  • Animism (as long as it’s subordinate to God’s authority)
  • Theism (in some forms)
    • Classical theism
  • Substantialism (since God made everything)
  • Polytheism (by defining “gods” outside of worthiness of worship)
    • Monolatry

Possible (but difficult)

  • Darwinism
  • Theistic evolution
    • Old Earth creationism
    • Gap creationism
  • Philosophical theism

False

  • Nontheism
    • Agnosticism
    • Atheism
    • Agnostic atheism
    • Ignosticism
  • Deism
  • Polytheism (almost entirely)
    • Henotheism
    • Kathenotheism

Epistemology: What is knowledge?

Since materialism can’t be true, behaviorism and its subsets are false (with only a few exceptions).

  • The implication that God can grant divine revelation means psychological behaviorism has some grains of truth.
  • Methodological behaviorism has truths contained within it, specifically in how we can’t control what others think and only what they do.

Rationalism is a logical consequence of believing a human soul exists, which also means empiricism (with associationism and verificationism) are effectively wrong.

  • As a side effect, positivism can’t be correct either.
  • Further, innatism is necessary to believe God instills morality into us from the beginning (Romans 1:20).

Presuppositionalism is necessary to believe God interacts with us through revelation and not simply logic.

Many domains of understanding can work well without any conflict:

  • Conventionalism can exist, but only to describe some human universals.
  • Dialetheism is entirely possible, since our understanding of the truth may be in error.
  • Ethnocentrism is at least partly true (including methodological relativism and polylogism), but there must be a carve-out for divine revelation and the work of the Holy Spirit.
  • Both internalism and externalism are connected to Christian doctrine:
    • There is Scripture that warns against associating with the wrong types of people (i.e., externalism).
    • We are held individually and uncompromisingly responsible for our innermost desires and beliefs, not just our actions (i.e., internalism).
  • Linguistic determinism, as well as descriptivism, can have a Christian basis.
    • However, linguistic relativism can’t be complete, since that would make the Bible partly irrelevant.
  • Logical atomism can help us to understand the primitives that hold up what we believe.
  • Phenomenalism gives some relativistic view on how we perceive, which can work up to a point.

Both externism and solipsism (as well as transcendental idealism and Hegelianism) are possible, but difficult because we’re not supposed to lean on our own understanding (Proverbs 3:5).

The Verdict

True

  • Rationalism
  • Innatism
  • Presuppositionalism

Possible (and useful)

  • Conventionalism (as long as we don’t go all the way with it)
  • Dialetheism (since ideas can be complicated)
  • Externalism (because our environment defines our thoughts)
  • Internalism (because we are morally responsible for our thoughts)
  • Logical atomism

Possible (somewhat)

  • Ethnocentrism (except for what God can do)
    • Methodological relativism
    • Polylogism
  • Linguistic determinism (but not completely)
    • Descriptivism
  • Phenomenalism (as long as there is absolute behind it)

Possible (but difficult)

  • Behaviorism (on a few points)
    • Psychological behaviorism (since God can grant divine revelation)
    • Methodological behaviorism (since we can’t control others’ thoughts)
    • Post-Skinnerism (since people are kindasorta predictable in large groups)
  • Externism
  • Solipsism
    • Transcendental idealism
    • Hegelianism

False

  • Behaviorism (almost entirely)
  • Empiricism
  • Linguistic relativism (at least in its entirety)
  • Positivism

Epistemology: How much can we know?

Christian worldviews have a wide scope to describe our understanding:

  • Both critical realism and representationalism works fine because they get into details about how we understand more than whether understanding is possible.
  • Disjunctivism works, simply because we obviously can perceive things wrongly.
  • Infinitism can work, but only if we recurse or loop the reasons on themselves (since God’s thoughts create an original reason).
  • Intuitionism and logicism work well (as well as the opposite in preintuitionism), since Christian doctrine doesn’t concern itself much about the details of math.
  • Operationalism works because our observations can create values.
  • Both relationalism and substantivalism go far deeper into the weeds about how language and understanding work than anything remotely in Christian doctrine.

Deconstructionism (along with existentialism, interpretivism, and perspectivism) can be true, but must stop with most of our understanding.

  • The trouble with Christian existentialism and Christian existential humanism, though, is that it implies the universe is conceived of endless deceptions and uncertainties, which goes against the idea that the universe has inherent design characteristics formed for mankind to have a relationship with God.

Fallibilism presumes our minds are stable enough that we can keep things logically consistent and well-maintained.

Reliablism can work, but is difficult because knowledge could just as easily come through the soul’s innate grasp of a thing, without a reliable method (e.g., God giving direct understanding).

The existence of tautology must necessarily exist for the Bible to exist, whether in spirit or in implementation.

The Verdict

True

  • Tautology

Possible (or partial)

  • Critical realism
  • Disjunctivism
  • Infinitism (if the reasons recurse)
  • Intuitionism
    • Logicism
  • Operationalism
  • Preintuitionism
  • Relationalism
  • Representationalism
  • Substantivalism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Deconstructionism (as long as it’s our understanding isn’t completely unknowable)
    • Existentialism
      • Christian existentialism
      • Christian existential humanism
    • Interpretivism
    • Perspectivism
  • Fallibilism
  • Reliablism

Ethics

Both cognitivism and moral realism have merit, but can be sidestepped if God is morality incarnate (which can remove any reasoning we could make that navigates elements of it).

  • On the other hand, non-cognitivism can’t be true, since Christian doctrine draws a hard connection between ethical statements and truth.
  • Expressivism may have some truth to it, but it’s difficult to conceptualize in a Christian framing.

There’s plenty of room for emotivism and universal prescriptivism.

There is room for quasi-realism, but it can’t go so far that it defines all ethics as being purely emotional.

In many ways, Christian thinking embodies value pluralism directly, especially with respect to domains involving the Old vs. New Covenant.

The Verdict

Possible (or partial)

  • Cognitivism
    • Moral realism
  • Emotivism
    • Universal prescriptivism
  • Quasi-realism (as long as it’s not complete)
  • Value pluralism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Expressivism

False

  • Non-cognitivism

Ethics: Why are things good or bad?

Ascriptivism is an inherent requirement to accept we are responsible for our sin, which is a requirement to accepting Christ’s sacrifice.

Consequentialism (along with eudaimonism and situational ethics) is generally not true, except regarding what God can do (i.e., God’s consequences are righteous).

  • Non-consequentialism is generally true (i.e., follow God’s directives).
    • In some ways it can adopt flavors of extrinsicism or Kantianism, but easily diverges when the motivation becomes love for God and others.

Most aspects of humanism can dovetail with Christianity, but will create dangerously dysfunctional theologies.

  • Meliorism takes away from what God can do, implying people can rise to something beyond themselves.
  • Posthumanism removes any greater meaning that God has for humanity.
  • Secular humanism implies that our development is better without God being involved.
  • While transcendentalism and neo-Platonism sound fine within a Christian context, they imply that mankind can self-promote themselves through some form of understanding or spirituality (which goes against the Christian doctrines of defeatism).
    • Transhumanism, along with extropianism and singularitarianism, imply transcendentalism, but through science and technology.
  • Religious humanism and Christian humanism try to split the strong difference between humanism and Christianity, which severely dilutes anything legitimately Christian about it.

Christianity emphasizes moral absolutism (and therefore a type of moral universalism) based on God’s perspective, which sabotages any hope for moral relativism.

The Verdict

True

  • Ascriptivism
  • Moral absolutism

Possible (or partial)

  • Moral universalism
  • Non-consequentialism
    • Extrinsicism
    • Kantianism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Consequentialism (except for God)
    • Eudaimonism
    • Situational ethics
  • Humanism (in every one of its forms)

False

  • Moral relativism

Axiology: How do we find purpose?

It’s entirely possible to have a meaningless form of Christianity, though it’s not recommended:

  • Absurdism is difficult to justify, since God designed the universe for us and it is literally designed to give us purposes.
  • Nihilism is also possible, but sabotages the implicit meaning of God’s design.
    • Fatalism, in particular, is only possible with Christian doctrine if we see God’s omniscience as taking away the value of our agency.

Anthropomorphism is acceptable, and in some ways encouraged by God (i.e., the Bible refers to God’s “hands”, God’s pronoun is a “him/he”).

To an extent, egoism’s descriptive aspects (and both cynicism and psychological egoism) is true (i.e., our sin condition), but it can’t be all-inclusive or there would be no hope for humanity’s moral redemption.

As a derivative of humanism, Freudianism is possible, but never directly addresses our moral condition correctly.

Hedonism must be fundamentally true as a description of our pleasure-seeking design.

The Verdict

True

  • Hedonism

Possible (or partial)

  • Anthropomorphism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Absurdism
  • Egoism (outside of what God does)
    • Cynicism
    • Psychological egoism
  • Freudianism
  • Nihilism
    • Fatalism

Axiology: Where should we place our purposes?

In Christianity, amor fati is all depending on perspective:

  • Knowing that God is ultimately in control should give us some degree of closure.
  • However, the value system goes too far when it minimizes the emotional realities of present hardships.

Anthropocentrism is a fundamental belief of Christianity, with the idea that the universe is all designed for man’s relationship with God.

Christianity conforms to immortalism, even including nearly every doctrine of hell (since eternal destruction would mean never actually being destroyed).

While pragmatism can exist, it doesn’t serve as a greater place than what God wants.

Teleologism can affect Christianity profoundly through the understanding that God designs everything very cleverly with a purpose.

The Verdict

True

  • Immortalism

Possible (or partial)

  • Amor fati
  • Anthropocentrism (if it’s about man’s relationship with God, and not just man)
  • Pragmatism
  • Teleologism

Axiology: How should we gain knowledge?

Since our certainty can never be complete (given our fallen state and God’s commands to trust Him), the approach in Scripture to gaining knowledge is somewhat unimportant by comparison:

  • Coherentism and foundationalism are both fine, though good theology leans toward foundationalism.
    • However, in some ways, functionalism may have more merit, simply because it leans against reductive materialism and logical behaviorism.
  • Critical rationalism (along with falsificationism) has merit, since even science science can’t fully validate our understanding.
    • However, pancritical rationalism goes too far, since it interferes with God’s direct authority.
  • Logical positivism has some use, but could be regarded as a waste of time, and makes comtism is a complete waste of time.

Deism can’t work because the basis for knowledge comes at least partly through God’s inspiration.

Experientialism can be validated in some ways (e.g., Luke 1:3-4).

Inductionism has enough Scripture to indicate it’s at least partly true (especially in Proverbs), but it can’t be complete.

  • Inductivism and scientism can’t be true due to our fallen state affecting the scientific community.
  • Psychologism is likely untrue unless we define Scripture as a type of philosophical study.

Instrumentalism has some degree of truth to it, simply because love is materially more important than truth.

Irrealism doesn’t work because it sits on the presumption of physicalism having value.

Kierkegaardianism is possible, but takes a lot of work and requires being very smart.

Occam’s razor has a ton of use, and is often the role of most church leadership.

  • Further, many modern churches have proven greedy reductionism, especially on critical doctrinal issues.

Phenomenal conservatism must necessarily be true regarding God, though it doesn’t always extend to society (e.g., being “shrewd as serpents” in Matthew 10:16).

Skepticism (and the domains of postmodernism, probabiliorism, probabilism, and pyrrhonism) is very difficult to harmonize with Christianity, since it alienates the general nature of God’s design for the universe.

Implicitly, Christians do believe a form of structuralism within God’s ultimate plans.

Believing in absolute truth defies subjectivism, and by implication post-structuralism.

Syncretism is a very common reality within Christianity, in many directions, with the most prevalent one being the base concept of being “born again“.

The Verdict

True

  • Structuralism
  • Syncretism

Possible (and useful)

  • Inductionism
  • Occam’s razor
    • Greedy reductionism
  • Phenomenal conservatism (with respect to God)

Possible (or partial)

  • Coherentism
  • Critical rationalism
  • Experientialism
  • Falsificationism
  • Foundationalism
  • Functionalism
  • Instrumentalism
  • Logical positivism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Comtism
  • Kierkegaardianism
  • Phenomenal conservatism (with respect to anything but God)
  • Psychologism
  • Skepticism
    • Postmodernism
    • Probabiliorism
    • Probabilism
    • Pyrrhonism

False

  • Deism
  • Pancritical rationalism
  • Inductivism
  • Irrealism
  • Scientism
  • Subjectivism
  • Post-structuralism

Axiology: What is the most moral thing to do (greatest good)?

A relationship with Jesus is portrayed directly as a form of very personal mysticism.

  • All Christians convert by accepting a form of defeatism about our moral state.
  • To even acknowledge that defeatism, they must accept some level of objectivism (at least with how God sees it).
  • To follow Jesus is to accept a form of altruism (and collectivism, to some degree) as a directive on how to live.
  • The altruism in Christ also happens to be a very radical and specific form of pacifism.

Some ideas are possible, but don’t capture the spirit of Scripture:

  • Antinatalism (particularly with leftward thinking) is possible, but difficult to validate in light of God’s love for humanity (and desire for more people as a logical product of it).
  • Antinominianism is possible due to the scope of Jesus’ sacrifice, but it misses Jesus’ general directive to “go and sin no more” (John 8:11).
  • Asceticism is possible to conclude, though it has been taken too far (e.g., 1 Corinthians 8).

The call to Christ has an implicit opposition to all ethical egoism.

  • To a lesser extent, it’s very difficult to uphold careerism, consumerism, and emotionalism.

Christianity could be classified as a type of ethical hedonism, with the joy derived from a relationship with God being the greatest good.

  • However, it can’t be the highest end, which makes most implementations of Epicureanism far too extreme.
  • In a sense conformity to God’s standards is a type of utilitarianism, though it requires justifying the calculation as being beyond our understanding.
  • Further, if the Body of Christ is a new adoptive family, there is an aspect of role ethics.

Since Christianity opposes naturalism, humanistic naturalism can’t be consistent with it.

The certainty of Scripture and God’s commands makes immoralism impossible.

Since God’s divine inspiration is the best way to gain understanding, intellectualism is difficult to maintain without defining divine inspiration as part of our reasoning.

Christianity has a type of irrationalism (through the understanding of divine inspiration), but doesn’t go far enough that it completely dismisses the value of reasoning.

Strong Christians often adopt a form of perfectionism (such as the idea of spiritual gifts).

Following Jesus requires a humble attitude driven toward love for others, so both Randianism and Stoicism are entirely possible, but difficult to harmonize.

The Verdict

True

  • Altruism
  • Defeatism
  • Mysticism
  • Objectivism
  • Pacifism

Possible (and useful)

  • Collectivism
  • Hedonism
  • Perfectionism
  • Role ethics

Possible (or partial)

  • Asceticism
  • Irrationalism
  • Utilitarianism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Antinatalism
  • Antinomianism
  • Careerism
  • Consumerism
  • Emotionalism
  • Epicureanism
  • Intellectualism
  • Randianism
  • Stoicism

False

  • Egoism
  • Humanistic naturalism
  • Immoralism

Axiology: Do we have free will?

Some Christians believe in incompatibilism, but most Christians believe a form of compatibilism/soft determinism.

  • Many Christians also advance open theism.
  • A few Christian sects assert a type of metaphysical libertarianism.

Personalism is also entirely possible without any issues.

The Verdict

Possible (and useful)

  • Compatibilism/soft determinism
  • Open theism

Possible (or partial)

  • Incompatibilism
  • Libertarianism
  • Personalism

Axiology: How can mankind be morally saved by an all-knowing God?

In soteriology, multiple doctrines can be at least mostly consistent with Scripture:

  • Arminianism and Calvinism are mostly the same, but hinge heavily on whether people can resist God’s calling.
  • Molinism is possible for Christians, and even likely in many doctrines of the Trinity.
  • Fideism makes a hard distinction between faith and reasoning.

Pelagianism can be justified, but needs a bit more criteria to clarify it, but has been regarded as heresy by the Christian church at large.

  • Semipelagianism is a hybrid, and therefore a little easier to work with, but has many of the same issues.

Gnosticism isn’t possible for Christianity, since it takes away from the simple directive to believe in Jesus.

The Verdict

True

  • Soteriology

Possible (and useful)

  • Molinism

Possible (or partial)

  • Arminianism
  • Calvinism
  • Fideism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Pelagianism
    • Semipelagianism

False

  • Gnosticism

Aesthetics: What should we define as quality?

Aestheticism can be very true in Christianity, particularly if a relationship with God is not built inherently on a purpose but instead on an essence.

While aesthetic formalism has merit, it goes too far if it straddles into someone’s ethical issues with a social or historical context.

Romanticism has value until it becomes an ethical consideration.

The Verdict

Possible (and useful)

  • Aestheticism

Possible (or partial)

  • Aesthetic formalism (until it defiles another’s conscience)
  • Romanticism (until it becomes an ethical matter)

Aesthetics: How should we create?

It’s hard to not argue that God’s divinely inspired creations are performed via automatism, and worth considering in light of spiritual gifts.

Classicism is a huge aspect of Christian tradition, especially with respect to art.

In a sense, creating without a focus on God can be risky, and modernism and primitivism can create adverse consequences when not merged with other values.

While creating against the essence of order can magnify the human experience, there’s a “middle ground” in the domains of expressionism, surrealism, and symbolism that avoids detracting from God’s glory.

The Verdict

True

  • Automatism (for Scripture)

Possible (and useful)

  • Automatism (for everything we make)
  • Classicism

Possible (or partial)

  • Expressionism
  • Surrealism
  • Symbolism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Modernism
  • Primitivism

False

Political Science: Can we understand politics and society?

The unpredictable aspects of living in a fallen world with some people being regenerated by the Holy Spirit make behavioralism difficult to implement.

  • At the same time, economic formalism ends up being remarkably consistent about human nature.

Interactionism has merit, and is arguably how God works.

Social atomism has limited use due to the changing spiritual nature of each individual at any given point in time.

The Verdict

Possible (or partial)

  • Economic formalism
  • Interactionism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Behavioralism
  • Social atomism

Political Science: What’s wrong with society?

Since the entire point of Christianity is that Jesus is a personal and eternal King, anarchism (as well as anarcho-primitivism and anarcho-syndicalism) is difficult to justify.

The issue of sin is more prevalent than any issues created from technology, so environmentalism is difficult to harmonize.

The male/female dichotomy in Christian doctrine leans heavily toward complementarianism and away from feminism.

Since Marxism (and Communism, distributism, Neo-Marxism, and Socialism) branches from dialectical materialism, it’s inherently against Christianity, and it is absurdly difficult to harmonize the two (though its ideals represent a vision that has aspects close to what Jesus will institute when He comes back).

Mohism contains some truths, but implies that human nature can self-conform to being more loving, which defies Christian defeatism.

Christians do believe in a type of reconstructivism, but is asserted on a much more individual level in this life.

The Verdict

Possible (and useful)

  • Complementarianism
  • Reconstructivism

Possible (or partial)

  • Mohism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Anarchism
    • Anarcho-primitivism
    • Anarcho-syndicalism
  • Environmentalism
  • Feminism
  • Marxism
    • Communism
    • Distributism
    • Neo-Marxism
    • Socialism

Political Science: Who should have power in society?

Since Christianity leans into honoring whatever government is in control, many government policies are acceptable to them.

  • Communalism and individualism are both acceptable (as well as communitarianism), though Christianity leans a little bit toward individualism.
  • There is a type of liberalism present in Christianity, though it doesn’t veer into fully permitting evil and leans away from libertarianism.
  • Christians have a specific type of contractarianism that presumes God established national laws for the lawless (1 Timothy 1:9).
  • While the modern technology trends advance techno-progressivism, Christians don’t really care (with the specific exception of the “mark of the Beast” from Revelation 13:16-17).
  • Christians also range wildly on the matter of youthism.

While they honor government, Christians do lean into some political ideas:

  • Egalitarianism runs strongly, and works somewhat against mercantilism and fascism.
  • They typically believe a type of speciesism since the Bible asserts that God created mankind different from all other creations.

All Christians believe in at least some form of conservatism, even if it’s as simple as preserving Scripture itself.

Christians also must believe a degree of nativism, especially regarding many traditions and the Bible itself.

Given its secular background, Christians can believe social Darwinism and critical race, but it is difficult to justify alongside Scripture.

The Verdict

True

  • Conservatism
  • Nativism

Possible (and useful)

  • Contractarianism
  • Egalitarianism
  • Speciesism

Possible (or partial)

  • Communalism
  • Communitarianism
  • Individualism
  • Liberalism
  • Techno-progressivism (except the mark of the Beast)
  • Youthism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Libertarianism
  • Mercantilism
    • Fascism
  • Social Darwinism
    • Critical race

Political Science: How should we pick our leaders?

Since Christianity was formed during a polytheistic theocracy, there’s very little precedent for more modern political systems (and even less precedent since the Reformation).

  • Capitalism conforms well with the moral realities of man’s sinful nature, but directs it toward a type of non-self-interested ends, though anarcho-capitalism takes the idea too far to easily conform it.
  • Democracy connects well with Christian egalitarianism, though it isn’t always a hard connection.
  • While political absolutism (and enlightened absolutism) isn’t discussed much among Christians, it’s acceptable enough (since God will have the final judgment on political leadership).
  • Associationalism serves as a hybrid between political absolutism and democracy, meaning there’s no issue.

To the extent that Christians can disagree with it, they do not like alternate theocratic rule, meaning Islamism and secularism aren’t preferable, though there is theological room to believe one of them is an inevitable reality.

The Verdict

Possible (and useful)

  • Capitalism
  • Democracy

Possible (or partial)

  • Associationalism
  • Political absolutism
    • Enlightened absolutism
  • Theocracy

Possible (but difficult)

  • Anarcho-capitalism

False

  • Islamism (generally)
  • Secularism (generally)

Political Science: How should we enforce laws?

To believe in God’s grace and mercy creates a general leaning against raw coercive approaches like authoritarianism and totalitarianism.

There is Christian precedent on both sides of some domains:

  • Legal formalism (and legalism with originalism), since the rules represent the order of God, but loving behavior in a courtroom can mean bending the rules.
  • Political individualism, since the downtrodden and suffering may be an individual, or may be a group.

Christians lean into the belief of natural law (and some level of legal realism), meaning they lean against positive law (as well as legal interpretivism and legal naturalism).

The Verdict

Possible (and useful)

  • Natural law

Possible (or partial)

  • Legal formalism
  • Political individualism
  • Legal realism
  • Legalism
    • Originalism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Authoritarianism
    • Totalitarianism
  • Legal interpretivism
  • Positive law
    • Legal naturalism

Philosophy’s Culture

Christian philosophical discourse runs closer to their theological circles and applications toward biblical interpretation.

  • Aristotelianism (as well as Neo-Aristotelianism and contextualism) is very strong within much of Christian culture.
  • Cognitivism and truth claims is frequent in Christian tradition, typically within apologetic evangelism.
  • Eclecticism is also frequent among Bible scholars.
  • Scholasticism is not only common among Christian dialogue, it’s part of the Bible!
  • Thomism is necessary for any heavily measured Christian exploration, since there is no end to the study (Ecclesiastes 12:12).

Particularism isn’t as common, but can be used without any issues.

In some ways, the Platonic school leans against most Christian thinking.

Ancient sophism works somewhat against Christianity, since the emphasis is on how to behave and not on abstracted virtue alone.

The Verdict

True

  • Scholasticism
  • Thomism

Possible (and useful)

  • Aristotelianism
    • Neo-Aristotelianism
  • Contextualism
  • Cognitivism
  • Eclecticism
  • Truth claim

Possible (or partial)

  • Particularism

Possible (but difficult)

  • Ancient sophism
  • Platonic school