On 16 Oct 2014, at 18:27, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/16/2014 12:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Oct 2014, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote:
Bruno seems to think that if you fail to believe in the existence
of Santa Claus you must have a definite idea of what "Santa Claus"
refers to and therefore you do believe in Santa Claus. A curious
inference for a logician.
Brent, are you trying to compete with John Clark, in attributing me
things I have never said.
All what I said is that Atheists and Christian defend the same
conception of God. The atheists defend that conception so that they
can announce proudly to the world that there is NO god.
And doing so, they share the literalism of the fundamentalist
christians.
The don't "defend the concept",
The Atheists (the strong non agnostic one) asks we keep all the
religious term in the sense of one particular religion, lthough there
are variant: the ultra-string atheists believes all the terms of any
religion/theology makes no sense.
they accept that usage defines the word.
I am not sure you can extrapolate this for the spiritual domain. I
remind you one of my favorite meta-axiom about God. It has no name.
Plotinus was aware of the difficulty, but is almost valid in his
explanation of how we can use word as pointer to what we can either
not know, or, in some sense, know to much intimately to figure out a
name or a description.
And when careful in philosophical discourse they make it explicit
that they mean the god the theism, to distinguish this from the god
of deism and from abstract principles of organization and love and
all the other things that people have said are "god"
Yes. That is nice. But then why all the fuss, given that I made also
explicit that I am talking of the God in the large sense of the
greeks, those who made science including theology. That sense was
already encompassing the theories of the Indians, the jews, the
zoroastrians.
In science we adopt often large sense to start the research. God is
the big interrogation point, in that large sense.
The God of physicalism (not of the physicists necessarily) is a
primary physical universe/matter.
The God of the Christians and Muslims is the God of the bible.
All civilisation have been concerned by such notions, sometimes with
many gods and goddesses.
The term "God" is universally used by everyone to denote the one
responsible (in some variate sense) for what happens, and that we
don't understand.
Saying there is no such God is equivalent with we have understood
everything, the rest are technical details.
in order to manipulate others or comfort themselves.
In the theology of the Gnostics (ate the time of Plotinus), God is
both incompetent and a bad guy.
The idea that God is good is in Plato, but I am not sure if that idea
is not much older.
With comp, from the machine views it is hard to say truth is good, but
it might be better than the lies. I dunno.
Bruno
Brent
--
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/d/optout.
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/d/optout.
