Hi John Clark 

Try God= universal intelligence.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/12/2012 
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him 
so that everything could function."
----- Receiving the following content ----- 
From: John Clark 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-09-11, 12:36:24
Subject: Re: The poverty of computers


On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

?
> God = truth 

Certain statements can fool people into thinking they have made a profound 
discovery when they have not, they probably work so well because people often 
want to be fooled, but all they have obtained from their efforts is a 
unnecessary synonym. Redundancy is not the same as profundity? 


> makes a bridge between two fields,

What two fields?? 

> I know many people talking english and using the term God in a non fairy tale 
> sense

I have been hearing that claim for months now, but whenever I ask for a 
specific example all I get is new age pap like God is one or God is truth.


>? the term "God", and the notion behind has a long tradition of being debated. 
>In Occident, we have also good reason to be suspect on the use of that term

Absolutely true, so why use a term that has such a astronomical amount of 
baggage? I am now going to make a radical statement, If you want to say that 
something is true then use the word "true". ? 



> God is the truth that we search, but can't make public. 

If they can't make it public why the hell do people talk about God so damn much 
in public? 



> Read Plato for learning more on this.

I already know far more philosophy than Plato did so I don't think that would 
be helpful. Of course today we don't call it philosophy we call it science; 
philosophy deals in areas where not only the answers are unknown but you don't 
even know if you're asking the right questions. Forget about the answers, in 
Plato's day he didn't even know what questions to ask about the nature of the 
stars or of matter or of life, but today we do and so those subjects have moved 
from philosophy to science.


> Here you confuse physical reality and primitive physical reality.

There is no doubt that somebody around here is confused. 



> I have shown you that you were confusing the 1-view and the 3-view, or the 
> 3-view on the 1-view 

There is no doubt that somebody around here is confused. 

? John K Clark

?


-- 
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.

-- 
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