On 21 Jan 2013, at 22:33, meekerdb wrote:

On 1/21/2013 9:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Impossible, or comp is false. No machine can ever figure out that there is anything without postulating it by faith.

No, postulating it by hypothesis.

You miss the point. It is an hypothesis when we reason on it, and it is an act of faith when we use the hypothesis in "real life" (like saying "yes" to a doctor, or taking a plane, etc.).




The fact that such postulation is unconscious makes this counter- intuitive, but with comp it is provable with mathematical logic.

You are too quick to equate a provisional entertainment of a propisition with faith, from which you jump to religion.

I made clear that I use the term in a larger sense that any particular religion, and actually I use the term as used by Plato.


This the liberal theologians move that John rightly mocks: "If you believe anything then you believe in God because God is that thing.

No. It is more "If you believe in anything you believe in God because God, by the definition I use, is responsible for that thing." There is no reason to jump to "God is that thing", which would make the word just empty.



" It's a move that made Paul Tillich famous, because he did it so nakedly.


Here you betray that you really believe, in the pseudo-religious sense, in Aristotle theology. You confirm my feeling that atheists might be only *naive* christians which are deeply unaware of their faith. You really can't doubt that there might be any other notion of "God" than yours, even to disbelieve in, and apparently you can't doubt that reality might not be WYSIWYG.

And you apparently believe you can take a word that has had a fairly fixed meaning for 1500yrs (by your reckoning)

In our country. You can use the Chinese TAO, but people would also take that naming too much seriously.



and when someone uses it you can say they are wrong because it really mean what Plato meant by it (although he spoke a different language). I'm sure Plato was criticized because he didn't use it to refer to Uranus and Gaea

I have never found such accusation, and besides, it would be normal. Mathematicians and scientists are often criticized when they suggest theories which does noit fit intuition or popular superstitions. That happens all the time.

Bruno



and so distorted the "real" meaning - in fact Socrates was condemned for corrupting youths belief in those gods.

Brent
“When we come to believe, we have no desire to believe anything else, for we begin by believing that there is nothing else which we have to believe…. I warn people not to seek for anything beyond what they came to believe, for that was all they needed to seek for. In the last resort, however, it is better for you to remain ignorant, for fear that you come to know what you should not know…. Let curiosity give place to faith, and glory to salvation. Let them at least be no hindrance, or let them keep quiet. To know nothing against the Rule [of faith] is to know everything.”
--- Tertullian


--
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.

Reply via email to