On Feb 23, 3:57 pm, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 23, 7:43 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 11:18 am, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > >    > > > > > Why would Gods be supernatural?
>
> > > > > >    > > > > Why would bachelors be married?
>
> > > > > > This is your argument, not mine. My whole point is that God becomes
> > > > > > natural, and inevitable under MWI + Comp.
>
> > > > > My point is that that argument requires the meaning of "god" to
> > > > > change, and, since language us public, you don't get to change it
> > > > > unilaterally.
>
> > > > It changes a little every time you use it.
>
> > > There's an important difference between "it changes" and "I am going
> > > to change it".
>
> > Not for me.
>
> Then you are wrong.

No, I'm just in control of my own expression. I don't need permission
alter it.

>
> > > >That's how words work.
>
> > > That is one side of the picture. Shared meaning is the other.
>
> > That's what I'm saying, meaning is shared in between the lines. It
> > doesn't rely on adhering to linguistic conventions strictly.
>
> "between the lines" is a vague, meaningless metaphor.

not at all. it is a tremendously successful and ubiquitous metaphor.
It's in no way vague. It specifies precisely that communication is
carried by the figurative gaps between words, not merely by the lines
on the page. You have to connect the dots, figure it out, get to the
point, see what they mean, etc.

>
> Common meaning. OTOH, literallu is adhering to linguistic convention.
>
> > > > > I don't know how to get accross to you that it is about WHAT THE
> > > > > WORD GOD MEANS.
>
> > > > I don't argue about what words mean.
>
> > > No: you don;t pay attention to the issue and so
> > > end up miscommunicating and talking past people.
>
> > That happens with some people and not with others.
>
> Who have you succeeded in explaining yourself to?

I get almost entirely positive feedback from my blogs. It's only here
and places like this where people complain.

>
> > Different ways of
> > thinking use words differently. I'm never trying to talk past people,
>
> I didn't suggest it was literal.

You mean intentional? See - I was able to read in between the lines
and see what you meant. Without a dictionary.

>
> > > > > > We can invent as many words for it as we want, but none will be any
> > > > > > more or less appropriate than God.
>
> > > > > Says who?
>
> > > > Who doesn't say?
>
> > > Me.
>
> > Why though?
>
> Because God has implications about who created the whole Shebang, and
> not

Maybe to you. I didn't grow up in a religious family. 'God' has always
been a creepy pyramid scheme to me. Besides, the Matrix Lord is the
creator of simworld.

> just about which fallibel entity is able to lord it over even more
> fallible
> ones in the next layer down. "Matrix Lord" is fine though.

Craig

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to