On 9/14/2012 9:04 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Alberto G. Corona
That's why I stick to orthodoxy and the creeds.
Hard to go wrong that way.

Hi Roger,

But you do so at the real risk of ossification. You stop asking questions, thinking that "I know all that can be known". This becomes "fear of the unknown".

Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net <mailto:rclo...@verizon.net>
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."

    ----- Receiving the following content -----
    *From:* Alberto G. Corona <mailto:agocor...@gmail.com>
    *Receiver:* everything-list <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>
    *Time:* 2012-09-14, 07:27:26
    *Subject:* Re: Re: victims of faith

    Roger: right
    But there are two types of people: the ones that know that believe,
    that know that they are unfounded and the others that believe that
    known, who don磘 know that they are unfounded

    2012/9/14 Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net
    > Hi Alberto G. Corona
    > All religious beliefs are at the bottom unfounded.
    > So is the fact that you are real unfounded.
    > All scientific theories moreover are founded on assumptions,
    > which by definition are unfounded.
    > Need I go on ?
    > Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net <mailto:%20rclo...@verizon.net>
    > 9/14/2012
    > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
    > so that everything could function."
    > ----- Receiving the following content -----
    > From: Alberto G. Corona
    > Receiver: everything-list
    > Time: 2012-09-13, 14:45:42
    > Subject: Re: victims of faith
    > 2012/9/13 Stathis Papaioannou :
    >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
    >>> There is no difference at all between religious mitifications
    and other
    >>> mitifucatuons . See form, example the paper about Darwin that
    I posted.
    >>> religion is a label that appears when the mith is old enough
    it has enough
    >>> believers and the object of mitification is far away in time.
    >>> People are reluctant to admit that they have unfounded
    beliefs. Specially if
    >>> they have been educated in the belief that any belief is bad
    and into the
    >>> belied that they have no beliefs. But to have a commong ground
    of beliefs is
    >>> a prerequisite for individual and social life. I think that my
    theory of
    >>> social capital, mytopoesis and belief and the assimilaion of
    good and truth
    >>> is sound in evolutuionary terms, and provides a
    factual/operation definition
    >>> of Truth in the world of the mind, which is the only world
    accesible to us.
    >> If I tell you that a spirit appeared to me last night and told
    me that
    >> you should give me all your money or else the world will be
    >> what will you say to me? That it's as true as any other myth,
    >> understandable in evolutionary terms, on a par with scientific
    >> Or will you just say, without thinking too hard, that it's
    > I suppose that you mean that there are histories that everyone would
    > identify as bullshit. Well, this changes nothing. A myth by
    > is something believed by a group of people in the past. Most of them
    > as intelligent or more that you and me . You and me believe in
    > that will be myths tomorrow. Most of them created by scientists. The
    > mith of antropogenic global warming, the myth of cultural
    > for example.. There are many things that were "scientific" in
    the past
    > "race studies" for example. Now there are "gender studies"... they
    > were, and they are scientific and bullshit at the same time. I hope
    > that this is clarifying.
    >> --
    >> Stathis Papaioannou




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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to