On 16 Jan 2013, at 19:56, John Clark wrote:

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

>> I could study anthropology or I could study literature or I could study history but I can't study theology because there is nothing there to study. There is no field of inquiry called "theology", there is only glop.

> This shows that you have not studied the field, which seems indeed pretty obvious.

13 years of studying this useless bullshit is not enough? I'll bet I know more about the Bible than most Christians.

It was not scientific studies. It was ideological-political brainwashing. I feel sorry for you as it is clear that you still believe they present theology to you, but they presented the usual perversion of it. A bishop said it once himself: atheists are our objective ally in the development of christianity. My father too was strongly brainwashed by catholic schools, and became a vindictive atheist, until much later the doubt came back, that is the scientific attitude.

> you take the "physicalist religion" for granted.

Wow, calling a guy know for disliking religion religious, never heard that one before, at least I never head it before I was 12.

Well, if you can doubt about the existence of primary matter, and physicalism, then it is weird that you seem not to be open to a theory which attempt to explain the appearance of matter from non physical things (like numbers). There is a difference between "asserting I am not religious" and "being not religious". I did provide a general axiomatic of God, and you do seem quite religious in that sense. And take this as a compliment, because with comp, all sane machine are religious, in that sense, which is close to the original sense of the mystics and the greek rationalists.

>> I once asked you if they study primary matter at CERN and you emphatically said no, so I conclude that whatever "primary matter" is it's a colossal bore.

> It is the natural ontology of the physicalism. It means notably that physics is the toold for studying what is.

Then the study of "primary matter" is the study of what isn't, or to put it another way a colossal bore.

Absolutely. That's why my work does not shock most physicists who got the point or the idea. It annoys only the fundamentalists atheists, which unfortunately seems to have taken in hostage the university in which I have developed my work (and a part of the media in france). They are my old Marxist "friends". In Europa, the Berlin wall did not fall at the West of Berlin, at least in some large part of the academical institutions. It is weird because my university, which I like very much, is based on the fight against all dogma, but they did not succeed apparently. It gives me the feeling that free-exam might be a protegoran virtue: meaning that you kill it when defending it with words.



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