On 07 Dec 2013, at 19:59, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/7/2013 12:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:55, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/6/2013 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:

I repeat the cult of men to men is the most primitive and dangerous religion. And RELIGION CAN NOT BE AVOIDED: you can not live without a form of religion or religions like you can not live alone.

This is just Paul Tilllich trick to convert everyone to religion by redefining religion. People cannot live without trust - they can live just fine without faith in religion.

Then why all that fuss by atheists when we show they need faith in something beyond what they can prove.

First, because you didn't show that we need faith - only that we need trust. Trust is different than faith; it is tested and earned.


That is a bit of a 1004 fallacy to me.

No, it's a simple matter of using different words for different things and not muddling the distinction. The Abrahamic religions make a positive virtue of faith:

"Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of
his Reason."
      --- Martin Luther

Every machine who want to be simply correct with herself cannot not tear her eyes out of his Reason, or if you prefer, cannot avoid discovering the gap between Truth and Proof.

Now, of course, I can recognize that Luther sentence can also be exploited by "politics", and that is the whole weakness of theology. But that is a reason to be even more rigorous in that field, not less.

A good course in non confessional theology could list the drawback of the theological faith, when blind.




“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

Same remark, but here, the "politics" idea seems prevalent (and is bad). the idea to separate science from theology is responsible for such use of "bad faith". Today, after listening to the machines, we would say the contrary. Like "if you have faith, never drop reason, as reason can only be extended by faith, and never been contradicted. If you feel a contradiction, ask yourself if you have not been abuse by some politics who want to manipulate you."



"Those who object to the punishment of heresy are like dogs
and swine,"
      --- John Calvin

Authoritative argument, I guess.





You identify faith with "blind faith". But "blind faith" is something which exist because for centuries you were burn alive if you did not have the "blind faith".

Events that were justified and approved by theologians.

Rational Theologians have been persecuted, exiled, banished from science and academies. That is why there are "pseudo-theologians" approving authoritative violent method of convicting people. That would stop when we will decide to come back on a bit of seriousness on the issue. That cannot be done in one day, but listening to the machine will help. They have very few prejudice, and can hardly be said to defend a religion, except for their belief in classical logic, but nome forbid to also listening to intuitionist machine if they want. (That does not make much sense in Platonism, though, and is equivalent with listening only to the first person (SAGrz) associated to the machine, and not to the "scientist" (G) associated to the machine).




Blind faith is a remnant of terrorist politics, like the religion has become on some ground.

No it's a remnant of religion - which inspires and justifies terrorist politics.

A remnant of pseudo-religion, due to the fact that we are not yet free to think in that aera. It is forbidden by atheists and fundamentalist alike.



Brent
"Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence."

Anyone who make fuzzy overgeneralization encourages violence indeed.

Some branches of Islam are notoriously intolerant, and I condemn them with vigor, but Christians have also gone through quite violent periods, and it is up to the believers in some institution to save the tolerance, if they want to save their institutions. The modern catholic clergy is not in so good health either, and beside, once you separate theology from the religious institution, it will be simpler to prevent the use of pseudo-religion as an instrument of hate, and it will be more natural to focus on the important common point between all religions/theologies, including the machine's one.

Bruno




--Spokeswoman for General Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, on Friday, September 15, 2006, commenting on recent remarks generally construed as anti-Islamic, by Pope Benedict XVI


--
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.

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