On 27 Jan 2014, at 17:18, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> John should read the book by Jammer on Einstein's religion. 2/3 of
that book is really informative about Einstein's religion.
Rather than read what Jammer had to say try reading what Einstein
himself had to say about God:
"it was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious
convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not
believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have
expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called
religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of
the world so far as our science can reveal it."
This makes my point. Einstein illustrates that you can believe in a
non personal God.
And:
"I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything
that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is
a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very
imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of
humility"
Yes. That's very close to my feeling even on only the consequences of
the elementary arithmetic.
You make my point again.
And:
"The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even
naive."
Yes. Absolutely. You are the one defending the concept of a personal
God. I am agnostic on that aspect of God.
And:
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man
would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of
punishment and hope of reward after death."
Again you illustrate magnificently the point I try to make. You can
feel to be a sincere "believer" without acknowledging the local
misunderstandings repeated and justified by violent means for centuries.
On the contrary, the more you "believe" the more you are shocked by
the fairy tales, and the institutions.
This does not entail that a confessional theologians will not write
correct theological proposition.
Then if your study comparative theology, you can also be stroked of
what is common in many believer talks.
And:
"I don't try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe
at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate
senses to appreciate it.”
This means that Einstein, unlike many, was aware of his theological
Aristotelian belief.
His feeling toward that reality is accompanied by an awareness of the
mystery.
Although to a far less degree I will admit that Einstein was
sometimes guilty of the same sin that members of this list
habitually commit, falling in love not with the concept but with the
English word "God" when all Einstein meant is "awe at the structure
of the world".
Not just awe at the structure of the world, but conscious of its
mystery.
Comp reduces that mystery to another one, the arithmetical truth (or
bigger if you want, with comp the awe is the same).
You are biased toward Einstein, because you could explain is
purposeful explanation of why he is definitely not an atheist.
Where I separate from Einstein, on religion, and go nearer Gödel, on
religion, is that I think that theology can be an object of serious
and rigorous study.
> John seems to be unaware what God was for the greeks,
John is board to death by the Greeks, scornful of their enormous
ignorance
<sigh>
and utterly repelled by the unhealthy ancestor worship that is
epidemic on the everything list.
Wrong. We cite only the people who get the idea first. It is the
common practice. Or, we give precise repesentation theorems. Read the
Plotinus paper.
You seem to be unaware of all your assumptions, which basically,
started from the greek one, in our local geographical history.
You seem to take the Aristotelian (naturalist, materialist,
physicalist) theology for granted.
if you decide to be serious on the mind-body problem, you can
understand that it is not *granted*.
> John acts in a way which is typical for the usual christians.
Wow, calling a guy known for disliking religion religious, never
heard that one before, at least I never heard it before I was 12.
False. I told you this before, and more than one time.
You confirm my feeling that people who pretend to dislike religion are
those who have a religion, but forbid so much the doubt about it, that
they convince themselves that it is not a religion, but the TRUTH.
The fact that you ignore that you are religious, and indeed christian
(in absolute value) will not help you for making you one epsilon less
"christian".
If you want to be serious in those matter, you have to be aware of all
ontological commitments, and re-articulate them in precise theories.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
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.
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.
