Hi Stephen P. King
My stance there is absolutely anti-materialist.
Where do you see a materialistic statement ?
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/15/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-14, 12:40:45
Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain
On 9/14/2012 8:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Bruno Marchal
>
> Objective things are things that can be measured (are extended) and so are
> quantitative.
> Numbers can apply. Science applies. Computers can deal with them.
>
> Subjective things are inextended and so cannot be measured directly, at least,
> nor dealt with by computers at least directly.
>
> I think a more practical division would be the body/mind split.
> Perhaps set theory might work, I don't understand it.
Dear Roger,
You are assuming an exclusively "materialist" stance or paradigm in
your comment. Bruno's ideas are against the very idea.
>
> Roger Clough, rclo...@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: Bruno Marchal
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-09-14, 04:09:27
> Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain
>
>
> On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote:
>
>> Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb,
>>
>>
>> ROGER: Hi meekerdb
>>
>> First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so
>> it only works with half a brain.
>>
>>
>> MEEKERDB [actually it is BRUNO]: Bad decision. You are the one
>> cutting the "corpus callosum" here.
>>
>> ROGER: You have to. Quantity is an objective measure, quality is a
>> subjective measure.
>> Apples and oranges.
> You are too much categorical. Qualities can have objective features
> too. Modal logic, and other non standard logic are invented for that
> purposes.
> Geometry and topology can have non quantitative features, also.
>
>
>
>
>> Secondly, meaning is not a scientific category.
> Model theory studies a form of meaning. If you decide that something
> is not scientific, you make it non scientific.
>
>
>
>> So science
>> can neither make nor understand meaningful statements.
>> Logic has the same fatal problem.
> Only if you decide so.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> BRUNO ?: Not at all. Logic handle both syntactical or digital
>> transformations, and its
>> "dual" the corresponding semantical adjoint transformation. There is
>> proof theory and model theory.
>> Meaning is handle by non syntactical mathematical structures. There
>> are many branches in
>> logic, and semantic, alias Model Theory, is one of them.
>>
>> ROGER: Those are all tools for working with objective data such as
>> numbers or written words.
> Not at all. Model studies infinite structure, some of them have no
> syntactical or finite counterparts.
>
>
>
>> Then what do you do with subjective data ? Obviously you must throw
>> it out.
> On the contrary, even with just the UDA, consciousness is the basic
> notion at the base of the whole reasoning (which annoys of course
> those who want to keep it under the rug). You are either a bit unfair,
> or ignorant of the UDA.
> Its role consists in showing that the subjective data and the 3p stuff
> are not easily reconciled with comp, as we must explain the physical
> 3p, from coherence condition on the subjective experience related to
> computations.
>
>
>
>> BRUNO To separate science from religion looks nice, but it consists
>> in encouraging nonsense in religion, and in science eventually.
>>
>> ROGER: Religion deals mainly with subjective issues such as values.
>> morality, salvation, forgiveness.
>> These are inextended or nonphysical human/divine issues.
> Yes, but that does not mean we cannot handle them with the scientific
> method. If not you would not even been arguing.
>
>
>
>> The Bible was not written as a scientific textbook, but as a manual
>> oof faith and moral practice.
> OK.
>
>
>> Science deals entirely with objective issues such as facts,
>> quantity, numbers, physical data.
> If you decide so, but then religious people should stop doing factual
> claims, and stop proposing normatible behavior.
> Science can study its own limitations, and reveal what is beyond
> itself. Like in neoplatonism, science proposes a negative theology,
> protecting faith from blind faith, actually.
>
>
>
>> BRUNO: Science cannot answer the religious question, nor even the
>> human question,
>> nor even the machine question, but it *can* reduce the nonsense.
>>
>>
>> Bruno
>> ROGER: You can try, which is what atheists do.
> No atheists have a blind faith in a primary universe. They are
> religious, despite they want not to be. A scientist aware of the mind-
> body problem can only be agnostic, and continue the research for more
> information. Atheists are Christian, as John Clark illustrates so well.
>
>
>
>> As I say, there are a few errors in facts in the Bible.
> Yes, like PI = 3.
>
>
>> But physics and chemistry have no capabability of dealing with
>> meaning, value, morality, salvation, etc.
> OK. Like electronics cannot explain the Deep Blue chess strategy. But
> computer science explains Deep Blue strategy, and it explains already
> why there is something like meaning, value, morality, salvation.
> Computer science deals with immaterial entity, developing discourse on
> many non material things, including knowledge, meaning, etc.
>
> As I said, you are the one defending a reductionist conception of
> machine, confusing them with "nothing but" their appearances.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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: meekerdb
>> Receiver: everything-list
>> Time: 2012-09-11, 12:47:05
>> Subject: Re: victims of faith
>>
>>
>> On 9/11/2012 5:58 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>>>> Hi meekerdb
>>>>
>>>> Science is science and religion is religion
>>>> and never the two shall meet.
>>> I'm not sure about this Roger. The goal of a true science and true
>>> religion, in my opinion, is the search of truth. In the Bah ' Faith,
>>> it is said that a true science and true religion can never be in
>>> conflict.
>> The Pope says the same about Catholicism. But that didn't keep the
>> Church from saying
>> heliocentrism was false, evolution didn't happen, disease is caused
>> by sin,... The
>> problem with religion is that it doesn't test it's 'facts'.
>>
>> Brent
>> To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous
>> as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin.
>> --- Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615, letter to Paolo Frascioni
>>
>> "The earth is flat. Whoever claims it is round is an
>> atheist deserving of punishment.
>> ---Sheik Abdel-Aziz ibn Baaz, the supreme religious authority of
>> Saudi Arabia, 1993, quoted by Yousef M. Ibrahim,
>> The New York Times, 12 February 1993 Yes, that's 1993 CE, not
>> BCE.
>>
>>> The son of the founder of the Bah ' Faith said, "If
>>> religion were contrary to logical reason then it would cease to be a
>>> religion and be merely a tradition. Religion and science are the two
>>> wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with
>>> which the human soul can progress. ... All religions of the present
>>> day have fallen into superstitious practices, out of harmony alike
>>> with the true principles of the teaching they represent and with the
>>> scientific discoveries of the time.
>>>
>>> We see this same sentiment expressed by Einstein, when he said,
>>> ?cience without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>> --
>> 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
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>> 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 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
>> .
>>
> 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 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.
>
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
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.
