How was God addressed in the middle ages?

God was addressed by some ways: heritage, and by society.
I dont really understand the question but I'll talk about some other stuff
back in that time, there were some problems when it came to God, and there were 2 types: the philosophical ones and the theological ones.
God was (or is..?) an omnieverything; by that I mean omnipresent and omnipotent, and everybody that didn't agree with that should shut up or should be burned in the bonfire, and also because of the individualization (you are what you are because God said so, and if you don't agree with that, you will be what God lets you to be)
a very big problem problem back in that time, was that, What language does God speak? its still a mistery...

Idols of the Mind

the Idols of the Mind are (for me) the margins of error that appear when we think, and also are not really easy to change, and are named by Francis Bacon. There are 4:
-Tribe Idols: they are idols that appear when we are in a new or different situation than usual and that request a fast response, and what happens is that we do what others do.
-Cave Idols: they appear when someone does a terrible, horrible, grotesque thing, and asks for a response as same as terrible, horrible and grotesque.
-Marketplace Idols: its a language problem, which can arise from differences in the culture, in the characteristics of the message (speed, tone, complexity), etc.
-Theatre Idols: wrong apprenticeship or misunderstanding and the diffusal of it.

the only thing I can say about it is that I hate them with my whole being and I think they come from people that like to act like idiots or are ignorants..

an example of a cave idol is what happened today at school: our homeroom teacher told us that we must bring the memo's signed by our parents, but many parents get the memo's through e-mails and of their children mouths, but still he insisted that we must bring them signed because his boss says so.

Rene Descartes

René Descartes (pronounced "ʁəne de'kaʁt" in french) was a french philosopher, mathematician and physicist born in 1596 and dead in 1650. he was considered the father of modern philosophy because other philosophers will base their works in Descartes'. Descartes thought a lot about materia and substances, but he was afraid of what his thought would cause (back in that time, philosophers where chased to death, or to the bonfire).
Ignoring that he could die because of his thoughts, he made up a method bonding Epistemology, Phenomenology and Existentialism, which is called the Cartesian Method. With the use of this method, Descartes affirmed that everything can be explained.
Also, he got to the conclusion of I think therefore I am with that method, and this is how he got there:
I don't know what I am, and I don't know the answer of it, but I can make questions about it, and that assures me that I exist
He also got to other conclusions, like that the Soul is the combination of the machine part and the substance part of the human being.
As the class went by, I started to get my own conclusion if I am real or not, and my mind seemed to explode. I didn't have any reason to think about that, and if I don't know the answer it wont change anything (i guess), but I did broke my brain joint thinking about that, and after some relaxation and new ideas I got to the conclusion that Descartes' conclusion is the most reasonable one about my existence (until we study others existentialist, i guess)
well I skipped some part of that class here in the post because its really complicated to blog about it but i got it so i think there is no problem :D

Descartes' Grave :D

What makes people follow a 10 year old kid talking about god and creation?

Most of the people follow everything that has a relationship with faith or God. But, what makes them follow a 10 year old kid talking about god and creation? I think because they find the kid cute, screaming all over the place, talking about God. At start, they think its a joke, but later on, they pay attention to what the kid says, and start to believe on him (remembering how was the first time.. the first impression is never erased). Most of traditional christians think religion is a big deal, and they take everything personal, even this kid; so when they hear someone talking about this kid, there will be 2 reactions:
1. Oh yeah, that kid is so right. Everybody should be like him (Hipocresy in another words)
2. Hey! stop talking like that about the kid! He is right, and don't mess with his mother! (Complete ignorance of the big picture)
Also, maybe people believe this kid because of the trust and emotion it inspirates on others (he could be talking about how he peed in his bed last night, and people would still take it seriously), his phrasing (which I think he made up while remembering one of his traumas as a strange boy), and because of the fact of being a boy with a suit that doesn't fit him. A clear way to prove that is watching his actual videos, and see that he doesn't have that charm he had as a boy...
Maybe every kid should go on stages, talk about things you dont understand, wear a big tuxedo, give interviews, sing, etc. and make money from it, because why talk about something you don't even understand completely with people clapping and (blindly) loving you if you can't make a profit of it... Which bring us back to the same question: Why? make your own conclusions...

Aristotle

Aristotle (in greek Ἀριστοτέλης, born in 384 BC, died 322 BC) was a Greek philosopher and a disciple of Plato. His thought differs from Plato's in a lot of things, like in metaphysics, political theory, and in psychology (the theory of the soul), speacially in the theory of the soul. Aristotle's base of psychology is this theory, and he bases his theory on natural science (I still don't know what he means with natural science), saying that the soul is the thing that owns the psychic functions (memory, breathing, nutrition, growing, emotions, perception, and thought), and the body is the thing in which these functions are embodied and receptors from other people. Also the soul is able to survive after the body is dead, keeping all its characteristics (but where does it go? no explanation there), totally independent of the body (so it can take over a body. Where? In the body factory before its delivery?) and immaterial.
In ethics, Aristotle talks about eudaimonia, moral virtues, virtues of intellect, the "mean", and how all this cant be achieved, only some of this or parts of all of them (maybe because that would be perfection itself... hmmm...)
I can specify all about Aristotle, but its late (22:00), I dont remember much of it because it was something we saw 2 weeks ago (short memory =P) and it must be done so Jose can check it and stablish my grades.

Is the soul a product of body functions?

For Aristotle, its the other way around (body functions are the product of the soul), and for me too. Only some body functions which end up to be fake or to be empty don't come from the soul, because soul is passion, and if there is no passion on what you do, then that body function comes from nowhere.
The soul is something immaterial, independent of the body and capable of surviving its death, according to Aristotle. I initially thought that the soul for Aristotle was the passion of a human being, the motor that keeps dreams alive, but I now see its something else.
For Aristotle, the soul can't work without a body, and also the other way around (well, it can work, but it would be the same as someone in a coma), because the soul has the functions of memory, breathing (well, the breathing is controlled by the brain, not the soul), nutrition, growth and emotions, and the body was only the thing that would interpret these functions and receive them from other people. In another words, Aristotle is saying that the brain is independent from from the body itself, but can't blame him for that. Technology wasn't so advanced, and they thought women are not people.

Socrates

Socrates (pronounced ˈsɒkrətiːz and wrote in Greek Σωκράτης) (born in 469-470 b.C.E., died in 399 b.C.E.) was a Classical Greek Philosopher that influenced in the definition of concepts like Society and Ethics in the time he lived, through dialectics.
some of Socrates characteristics were:
-Ugliness, which make him believe that beauty was not only on the outside, but on the inside, on the mind.
-Never wrote anything, all we know about Socrates is what Plato, his disciple, has wrote.
-The fact of being a philosopher, to actually create the concept of Philosophy, because in his time there were only sophists, by implementing dialectics to express arguments and develop wisdom and not only knowledge
-Naturalistic influence, which made him a particular philosopher with his believes, like the man is not equal to nature, that there is reason and that we think for something because of that.
-"Divine Voice", he thought that that actually existed, and because of that he was accused for creating new gods, and that was the straw that broke the camel (didnt mention it before, but sophists were pissed off with Socrates because after he created Philosophy the sophists classrooms were empty and they wanted to kill him, but couldnt find a good reason, so after the "divine voice" thing, they found it so accused him and thought they were free of Philosophy, but Socrates left an important message to Greece, so it was actually the beggining of a new era of Philosophy, people created and spread new ideologies)
Socrates wanted to teach people that we should learn from ourselves, and not from nature, and from that thought Ethics appeared, which means that if we think something is good, then its good.
But, if a thieve thinks that stealing is good, for reasons like its easier than working, you can do it whenever you want, you get what you want, etc., then, because of the concept of ethics, its good right? for the thieve its ok, but for everybody else its not..
thats why we dont discuss ethics in class.. total confussion..