Hi Bruno Marchal The demon is a living spirit (a monad) that requires an actual monad body to act through, just as God is a good spirit (acting through the Supreme Monad) that looks for a believing human monad to act through. Dominant monads always take over less dominant ones, I would hope that the good monads (angels) are more dominant than the demons.
Further: God, in his domain of Platonia or justice or necessary reason, allows all of this to happen for the best below in his imperfect, contingent, but best possible created world. But what is good for the whole or Johnny may not be good for you. So crap happens. Leibniz goes into this in much greater detail in his Theodicy (which means justifying God's ways to man). Roger Clough, [email protected] 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: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-12, 06:33:14 Subject: Re: On evil in the world as caused by an agent Hi Roger, On 12 Sep 2012, at 12:15, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Two horns ? Metaphorically, yes. But real, actual, and an agent, even though a metaphor. The Prince of Darkness, the Ruler of our earthly domain. That is a far more useful description than attributing evil to some pscyhiatric condition or fate or whatever. Evil generallly seems to act personally-- as an agent. And more often than not, to go after good people, Job being a prime example. Jesus another. Ten of the twelve apostles also died violent, painful deaths. Another example would be the shocking number of incidences of children or young women abducted, raped and murdered. A serial killer would be a good example of such a demon-possessed individual. Crime investigators find that he has no other motive than to kill. Invoking a demon, or a god, can be a useful metaphor, but cannot be taking as an explanation if we don't explain where the demon or God come from. G del's incompleteness (consistency entails the consistency of inconsistency) suggests a path for an answer. Bruno Roger Clough, [email protected] 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: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-11, 12:29:16 Subject: Re: fairness and sustainability On 11 Sep 2012, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal That's fine. Although it is a bit out-dated an idea, I conceive of the evil acting in evil people metaphorically as demons. With two horns ? :) Many people reports seeing daemons, and sort of daemons, on different psychedelics. Those daemons might be "just" interpretation, made by the neocortex, through culture and life-memory, of antic subroutines, charged of relative content, operating around de amygdala, who knows? Plausibly, with the comp hyp., they might already consist in sophisticated universal subroutines of the mind processing, and be common to very large collection of L bian machines or numbers. "demon" is a cute word, but be careful not to demonized the demon. if you act badly, knowingly, you sin (knowingly), the inspiring demon does not, and can't be used to attenuate the responsibility. The demons doing their job in hell, are there willingly, --I mean they are not punished. God love demons. It is very practical to test the creature for the heaven/hell question. Here I am not working in just comp, but with a momentary possible consistent christian extension. It does not make Satan himself into a friend, necessarily, as you can still (re)define Satan, by what makes you do the bad act, but in that case, you are Satan, when you sin (act badly). I don't know. Theodicy is the most complex part of theology. With comp, it can only be a sequence of harder and harder open questions (in arithmetic), none having really normative consequences except some sort of open mindedness and interrogative attitude towards the unknown and the unknowns. Bruno Roger Clough, [email protected] 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 10:26:30 Subject: Re: fairness and sustainability Hi Roger, On 09 Sep 2012, at 12:48, Roger Clough wrote: Marchal Hi Bruno By sin or evil I mean intentionally diminishing the life of others. OK. If you doubt that that is not the way of the world, you must not watch the news. I never doubt that, alas. Evil is not an abstract word, it is very real, and it lives to whatever extent in each of us. In two very different ways. In fantasy, with consent, and in act without consent. The good can and will never triumph on the bad, but it can reduce the harm. The extent of evil in you is not the problem, the sin is in the evil act that actually augment the harm of others. The evil is in all on us, you are right. But this does not make all person a sinner. You became a sinner only if you actually sin (diminish the life of others), intentionally, or not, I am not "sure" but with some degree or responsibility, relatively to different realities. The better you know the evil in you, the less surprising it is in unexpected circumstances, making easier the self-control. Some believe that "thinking bad things" is already a sin. But you have to think on bad things to say that, so it is a bit self-defeating. Bruno Roger Clough, [email protected] 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 13:54:23 Subject: Re: fairness and sustainability On 08 Sep 2012, at 16:41, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Indeed, we are all sinners. Hi Roger, Saying this can only dilute the responsibility and helps the "sinners". I am not sure at all we are all sinners, unless you are using a so weak sense that it is making every baby already sinning. I am not sure about the notion of sin. It looks too much like an easy way to explain suffering, and it makes many people feeling guilty for no reason that they can see, and sometimes it can act as a self-prophecy: "given that I have already sin why not sin again? I think that there is only one sin: hurting others without legitimate concern. And most people don't sin, I think, Bruno Roger Clough, [email protected] 9/8/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 08:37:30 Subject: Re: fairness and sustainability On 08 Sep 2012, at 12:35, Roger Clough wrote: Hi John Mikes Here's the dilemma: Unfortunately, any system -- with the exception of the oil-rich countries (where fairness would seem to be hard to define) -- that is completely fair is unsustainable. Capitalism, like it or not, is the only known way to increase a country's wealth. Fairness decreases a country's capacity to grow. Darwin would agree. Cuba and the former soviet union and now europe are good examples. They all failed in trying to be completely fair or are in the process of failing. I think that capitalism + democracy is the most fair system. Today, unfortunately, capitalism has been perverted by minorities which build money on fears, lies and catastrophes, and that is very bad. They are clever, and have succeeded in mixing the black and non black money, so that the middle class and the banking systems have become hostages. Those liars are transforming the planet economy into a a pyramidal con. Lying is part of nature, like cancers and diseases. Defending ourselves against liars is part of nature too. Bruno Roger Clough, [email protected] 9/8/2012 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 Mikes Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-07, 14:44:26 Subject: Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect Brent, I believe there is a difference between (adj) 'fair' or 'unjust' and the (noun) 'fairness', or 'consciousness'. While the nouns (IMO)?re not adequately identified the adverbs refer to the applied system of correspondence. E.g.: "Fair" to the unjust system. (I don't think we may use the opposite: "unjust" to a 'fair' system in our discussion). As I tried to explain in another post: the 'rich' consume MORE of the country-supplied services than the not-so-rich and pay less taxes (unfair and unjust). Certain big corporations also pay 'less' than the system would require (in all fairness - proverbially said) ordinarily. Semantix, OOH! John M On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:18 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 9/4/2012 1:12 PM, John Mikes wrote: It is a 'trap' to falsify the adequate taxing of the 'rich' as a leftist attempt to distributing richness. It does not include more than a requirement for THEM to pay their FAIR share - maybe more than the not-so-rich layers (e.g. higher use of transportation, foreign connections, financial means, etc. - all costing money to the country) in spite of their lower share in the present unjust?axation-scheme. ... And PLEASE, Brent, do not even utter in econo-political discussion the word "FAIRNESS"! So is it OK if I use "FAIR" and "unjust"? Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
