Hi Stephen P. King  

Sounds reasonable.  

Being a conservative, however, I tend to adopt orthodox views
such as that of Leibniz (to my mind at least) and the Bible.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
11/7/2012  
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 


----- Receiving the following content -----  
From: Stephen P. King  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-11-07, 11:02:01 
Subject: Re: Communicability 


On 11/7/2012 9:31 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 

Hi Stephen P. King   

Your criticism might be valid, but I never made the claim that Berkeley 
is said to have made. Leibniz, possibly more like you,  
would never have made such a claim. Leibniz believed that God 
is purposeful (caused things to happen at least partially due 
to end causes). 


Dear Roger, 

    My belief in God is anticipatory, in the sense that in the eternal struggle 
of Becoming, as I hold to be true that the beliefs of observers will almost 
always converge on mutually agreed upon facts and thus those observers will 
have physical worlds with lawful or nomic relations without assuming that avoid 
Plato? view that a universal can exist without being instantiated, as we see 
here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/052422q295335527/. These convergences 
are never a priori knowledge, they cannot be computed "ahead of time". 




Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net  
11/7/2012   
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen  


----- Receiving the following content -----   
From: Stephen P. King   
Receiver: everything-list   
Time: 2012-11-06, 18:12:43  
Subject: Re: Communicability  


On 11/6/2012 11:01 AM, Roger Clough wrote:  

Hi Stephen P. King  

Even Berkeley had to admit that no forest, no whatever..  
was foolishness and so said that in that case, God  
observed it. Get real.  

Hi Roger,  

     Then you are explicitly admitting that God's only purpose is to be   
an Absolute observer in whose eye all truth is definite. The problem is   
that such ideas cannot explain how that definiteness is consistent with   
the experimental results that confirm the violation of Bell's theorem   
and other theorems (Gleason, Kochen-Specker). All I am claiming is that   
the totality of all observers act as the absolute observer, not some   
hypothetical entity that if examined carefully falls apart as   
self-contradictory. What is so blasphemous about claiming that We are God?  





--  
Onward! 

Stephen

-- 
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