On 07 Dec 2013, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/7/2013 12:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch <[email protected]>
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]
> wrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is
not a religion.
Some religions may be, that doesn't mean they all are, however.
Could you give an example of a religion without dogma ?
Platonism, buddhism branches, taoism, neoplatonism, the
individual religion of all mystics, and ... the theology of
numbers.
In other words, what all the rest of the world calls "philosophy".
It can be done with the scientific modest attitude and respect for
the plausible facts, but then the world call it science.
"philosophy" has different meaning from university to university.
So does theology - and none of them agree with your meaning.
Not true. Note that when theology is taught in a university, it is due
to link between some academies and the religious institution, but even
there people seems to have no problem with the machine theology, or
its resemblance with Plato (scholar referees coming from there are OK,
although some told me they would not publicly defend computationalism,
given the Platonist consequence. They too are under the spell of some
physicalism).
How many people do you think there are on this list with a PhD in
theology or a Doctor of Divinity degree? How many with a PhD in
physics?
The truth or falsity of an idea has nothing to do with diploma and
number of people getting the idea.
Anyway, in science we use word by redefining hem all.
The fact that atheists are susceptible on words says something about
their pseudo-religious stance in the matter.
I use it for those who defend the truth of some theories, which is
something we don't do in science, be it in theology or botanic.
Atheism is not a religion, just as a vacant lot is not a type of
building,
That's agnosticism. With atheism, the lot is not vacant. (confusion
between ~[]p and []~p).
What do you think is on the lot?
The total absence of a divine reality, and most usually, a divine
reality made of matter. Yes, what is on the lot is inconsistent.
Brent
"Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color; like OFF is a
television channel."
Again that is agnosticism. (I suspect that you are not an atheist in
the european sense of the word. Those really believe in Matter, and
that there are no Gods, which is contradictory with the original greek
definition of god of course).
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
