Talk:Credo quia absurdum
| WikiProject Philosophy | (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] Old VfD
Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion Apr 21 to Apr 29 2004, consensus was not reached but used own discretion to redirect to Fideism. Graham :) | Talk 21:13, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Discussion
- Dictionary definition. Transwiki to wiktionary. Gentgeen 21:54, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Already listed in Latin phrases. Redirect or delete. Rossami 22:47, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Redirect to Fideism, where the source and meaning of the quote are discussed. Smerdis of Tlön 02:47, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- No one's mentioned it's also unspeakably ghastly. Delete. Quick! Pteron 06:13, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Did I fail to mention that this is unspeakably ghastly, and absurd?
- Delete - for reasons above - Tεxτurε 15:31, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
End discussion
[edit] Mistranslation?
My Latin is more than slightly rusty, but the entire gist of this page seems to me wrong based on a mistranslation. As far as I can tell, there is no causality either in the main page nor in the quotation from Tertullian. Not "I believe because it is absurd" but "I believe that which is absurd." The point is not an explanation of what why he believes but, rather, to state that we recognize that our beliefs are not all rational. This is rather similar to the argument made by many that science and faith are separate and, thus, not contradictory. Tertullian's point was that Jesus resurrection was no less certain because it is wholly outside the bounds of our understanding of how life and universe operate. I don't know that the subject doesn't warrant a page, but I am in no position to write it myself -- unless the above is sufficient basis -- but I tend to think this extant part should be excised and promptly.Czrisher (talk) 16:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The article says "poorly translated" and "misquoted". Well, that's big news to us who always studied Tertulian's works. As far as I know, "Credo quia absurdum" is this emperor's 15 minutes of fame and you need to provide more than your opinion to challenge it. This article should be edited, although that might upset those of you who want to edit mankind's history everyday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.31.33.109 (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
It is indeed a mis-quotation. The original phrase is "credibile est, quia ineptum est" ("it is credible, because it is ridiculous") http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_carn/evans_carn_03latin.htm (p. 18 line 25). 67.244.8.252 (talk) 06:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Further to the above, I would point out that the mis-quotation has achieved greater notoriety than the original, and suggest that, with this caveat, the phrase "Credo quia absurdum" does merit an entry. 67.244.8.252 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC).
