On 17 Oct 2014, at 00:11, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno ended his post with:
You did not answer my argument that you are not that much agnostic
when it comes to "is there anything more than (human, if you want)
numbers?
By using the expression "human math", it means you do believe in
some non human math. What is it, and why do you believe in that
things, and are you open that such non human math might be the
correct ontological realm of everything?
The two par-s have one thing in common: they pretend to "speak for
me" with Bruno's mind. If I do not believe that EVERYTHING copmes
from numbers (and watch the nex par: 'human logic' to that) that has
nothing to say about WHAT I do, or should believe, so it gives no
conclusion to judge my agnosticism.
OK. Just that sometimes you talk like if you were believing that
EVERYTHING does not come from the numbers, which is not agnostic. If
you just don't believe that everything comes from numbers, then you do
remain open to the possibility.
The 2nd par, however, puts an idea into my mind unauthorized (and
untrue): my alleged (and nonexistant?) belief in a "non human math".
The rest is hogwash.
I warned many times my highly esteemed list-collegues from
interpreting my term for 'agnosticism' from the definitions of
classical dictionaries. It contains the notion that - as a thinking
person - I accept MORE to this 'World' than described in our
yesterday's inventory and I accept the notion that at this point we
are not capable to 'know' all those - so far unmet and unexplained -
unknown components of some infinite complexity (infinite, because we
so far still did not see the 'limits' and complexity because it goes
further than our present (human?) thinking).
But today, thanks to Gödel, we know that even just the arithmetical
truth is beyond all possible inventory, and we, nor any finite
creatures, can ever know all those arithmetical truth. The complexity
of the number and machines relations is unbounded, unlimited, and go
further than, not just our present thinking, but all possible
thinking, even of the gods (non turing-emulable entity).
The stuff for such 'belief' comes from the cultural historic study
of the past, from gradually collecting more and more thus far
unknown notions (understood rightly, or wrongly).
With THAT agnosticism I lived and worked quite satisfied in natural
science R&D for a half century, collecting degrees, awards, patents.
publications, even editing a so called science magazine. Maybe my
'other side' as a semi professional musician (performing classical
music for public audiences over 75 years) helped me to stay in
balance.) I started to "think" at the young age of 66.
So you *are* open to the idea/theory/hypothesis that we are machine.
OK? It is just that you are open also to the idea that we might be non-
machine. By "we" I mean the part of the body needed to be conscious,
given that if that is a machine, then our soul is not a machine.
machine's soul are not machine already. It is a theorem in computer
science (accepting Theaetetus definition of knowledge or Plotin's
definition of soul).
Bruno
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 15 Oct 2014, at 21:42, John Mikes wrote:
I read Bruno's ID about theology some times - never really
comprehended it.
I got the notion that he sorts under such name the ideas of a
'startup of the World'
no matter on what theory.
About the "GOD" concept???? did ANYBODY EVER communicated about it
on a basis NOT hearsay, NOT dreaming, or 'postulate for otherwise
ununderstandables'?
(Meaning: within our momentary capabilities of human mental level?)
Is there anything known pointing to the "GOD" concept besides our
ignorance?
I discount "God said so to me" because the noun is unsecured.
Furthermore: I refuse Bruno's hint to the unoiform background to a
"Christian God concept" in this thread, initiated indeed on Muslim
ideas.
My position: a so called atheist requires a 'god' to deny.
More exactly, they need some sufficiently precise concept of God, so
that it makes sense to deny it vigorously.
I know two types of atheists. Some deny only the christian god, and
some deny all gods (except the physical universe, but with my
definition, if you deny all gods except the physical universe, you
make the physical universe into a god (the orogin of all things).
In my agnostic thoughts I accept lotsof 'things' we cannot?/do not?
know so far. I don't make up my mind to substitute for such
unknowable domains using our so-far acknowledged (poorly
understood??) knowledge-base as explanatory. Including math
(arithmetics) - a firm staple of our human logic and mentality.
You cannot know that. And to do science you do need to believe in
some truth independent of you.
You might have only a John Mikesean notion of "human".
I do not go for arguments EXPLAINING phenomena by (human) math.
Why humlan math, and not human physics, and human science, etc. By
definition we look for the universal, and never pretend it is the
truth. But if your allusion is correct, it is equivalent with: as we
will never know for sure, all research is ridiculous. But then we
will get the superstition for sure ...
Explanation is not procreation. Procreation - in most domains so
far - is beyond us, so I accept it as unknowable. Let us 'see' some
"God-related facts" (if there are facts to see at all) without 3p
testimony or 1p dreaming/conclusions. So far I did not.
So I do not condone the topic "GOD" in our (science-based?)
discussions. Also:
"THEOLOGY" (science based on the Greek God-word Theos=God) is
strange to me.
My wife said often: she envies the believers for their faith-based
mentality.
If you believe in your wife, you already have faith based
mentallity. No problem, all machines got it when they do research.
Agnostically yours
You did not answer my argument that you are not that much agnostic
when it comes to "is there anything more than (human, if you want)
numbers?
By using the expression "human math", it means you do believe in
some non human math. What is it, and why do you believe in that
things, and are you open that such non human math might be the
correct ontological realm of everything?
Bruno
John Mikes
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:20 PM, John Clark <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
>your dislike of religions hides a defense of a religion.
Wow, calling a guy known for disliking religion religious, never
heard that one before, at least I never heard it before I was 12.
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 everything-
[email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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 everything-
[email protected].
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 [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.
--
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.
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/d/optout.
