On 02 Feb 2013, at 09:08, meekerdb wrote:

On 2/1/2013 7:12 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

And here you come back with your vocabulary problem. You don't believe in the fairy tale version of christian God, and for some mysterious reason you want throw out all notion of gods like if it was the only one.

That's not accurate. I am happy to consider other notions of gods, but they are all persons and I don't believe any of them exist. The meaning you want to assign to "God" is the ultimate foundation of the world, which I would call "urstuff" or something similar.

I disagree.
I use God to avoid stuff, as we already know it is not "stuffy". Read the greeks. read the taoists, read many idealist school of buddhism.




The theory you have put forward that the world is emergent from the computations of a UD doesn't make the fundamental a person

It is an open problem.



and so I can't see any reason to call it "a god" of "God" of even "ONE" (since it is very numerous).

? Arithmetical truth is unique. The standard model of arithmetic is unique. And we can't really define it, without using more intuitions, on sets and infinities.

I did provide a definition of God: what is responsible for everything, and can't be named by its creatures. See the arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus for more. Even Plotinus was cautious about the "personhood of the ONE, and about its possible will".

Bruno



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to