On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:53 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you have to distinguish Bruno's use of "theology" here from more > conventional uses, >
And why does Bruno like to use such very very unconventional meanings of the word "theology"? Because he likes to throw the word back in the face of people known for disliking theology. And why does Bruno insist on radically re-engineering the meaning of the word "God"? Because he likes to make the "God" noise with his mouth. Here is a little test, if you re-engineer the meaning of the word X in such a way that absolutely nobody could logically say "I don't believe in X" then you know that your re-engineering has produced Bullshit. To save a lot of time and effort Bruno should simply swap the meanings of the words "religious" and "atheist", then the following sentence would be true: "I am religious and the Pope is a atheist." But of course such wordplay wouldn't effect the nature of reality one iota. > which is something like "believing that X is fundamental is an act of > faith." > Having a working hypothesis and believing in something so strongly on faith alone that you're willing to put on a dynamite vest and get on a crowded bus is not quite the same thing. 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/d/optout.
