On 02 Dec 2013, at 07:10, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/1/2013 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Using "God" for the ultimate reality, it seems to me, can in the long run enlarge the listening and the understanding of what the machines are already telling us.

Not as much as using "ultimate reality" for ultimate reality. One must suspect you have some hidden agenda to avoid plain speaking.

See the comment to Quentin that I made today. There is a subtle nuance between "ultimate reality", truth and "God".

I can come back on this, but it is so subtle, that I can hardly explain it without using the arithmetical hypostases. Plato and the neoplatonists, and mystics people (including machines) seem to be aware of that nuance, but it is hard to explain it in everyday day terms, and even Plato and Plotinus get unclear on that nuance (cf the abyss between the Timaeus and the Parmenides).

Nobody said that a theory of everything or a theology is a simple thing, and that's why we must be happy that with comp we can use computer science and mathematical logic to avoid easy but misleading identification.

It is due to that difference, between UR and God that the question of God being a person is still open in the machine's theology, and probably very difficult.

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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to