> On 5 Jan 2015, at 2:57 am, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> On 04 Jan 2015, at 00:30, Kim Jones wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 4 Jan 2015, at 2:47 am, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> But this "fearing of God" is a mystery to me. God should be good. Only the
>>> devil should be feared. (between us).
>>
>>
>> Is the devil "not-God"?
>
> Yes, we can say that in the Platonic context where the God is The Truth. Then
> the Devil is the False.
>
Makes sense. Truly fascinating. We "fear the false", then. I think the power of
The False is that it can somehow dissimulate itself. One is likely to mistake
The False for The Truth. Awareness of this pitfall means we fear our own
weakness, our own tendency to get a mistaken belief about something, yes? This
must be intuitive knowledge that is part of a racial memory or something.
> As such it does not "exist" in Platonia, but it can "almost exist" in the
> mind of the existing creature, and operate from there. This is due to the
> existence of false, yet consistent, proposition, relatively to "models" or
> "local realities".
But surely, The False exists? Or, when we think we have the devil by the horns,
we are really being gored by our own fear of....?
>
>
>
>> Is it not that "fear of the devil" is the same as the fear of God (in some
>> sense)?
>
> At the conceptual level, yes. Because once you have one, you have the other.
Dualism. But is The False equivalent to "evil". Most people talk about "good vs
evil" which may or may not correspond to "Truth vs False". I think evil is
much worse in some way than simple falsity. In fact, I would say that evil is
not really le faux. Evil is le mal, non?
>
> But we don't live at that conceptual level,
How so? Are you saying we are somehow obliged to view the world as committed
dualists? Can't we TRY to live at a conceptual level where we notice the way in
which things are the same, rather than continually dwell on how things are
different?
> and you better fear an hammer on the finger (example of bad, that is what the
> devil practically does) than a cup of coffee (as example of good, what God
> practically does).
Sure
>
> Of course I assume the platonist link between God and Good here. that is not
> clear at all when you interview the universal machine (even with good being
> defined through self-survival ability).
>
Ahhhhhhhhh.....the Truth is a survivor! Even more interesting. But there can be
levels of self-survival ability, yet Truth is surely an Absolute, the zero. Why
would a UM not experience a strong link between God and Good?
>
>>
>> Who or what IS this devil character anyway? Is such a concept necessary?
>
> I'm afraid yes, in its most primitive sense of bad.
OK. But I'm still hitched on the devil, the bad, the false or whatever as
something which doesn't exist in Platonia, as you wrote earlier. The very
notions of Truth and False are platonic. How can ideas, concepts NOT reside in
Platonia?
> As you say, for a platonist the ideas exist, and for a computationalists,
> they all have an infinity of Gödel numbers, or relative programs, or relative
> engrams, relative to some universal number(s). With computationalism, you
> cannot escape the fact that some solution of diophantine equations incarnate
> hellish experiences.
I, like you, am OK with cannabis, but I think I might stay away from these
diophantine equations. I don't really want to have any hellish experiences.....
>
> Then the higher level devil is just a poetical view of the idea of the "moral
> bad thing", or even the more general idea, and easier to define (as non
> linked to moral issue) that in a reality where you can augment the good for
> everybody, i.e. harm reduction for everybody, there will be situations where
> individuals or groups of individuals can accelerate the augmentation of their
> good by deceiving those outside the group: it is stupid in the sense of going
> from a win/win game to a win-a-lot/loss-a-lot game, but it makes sense
> locally, and nature does that a lot of times itself.
That's really scary, isn't it? So when someone rips you off, you can console
yourself by saying they were only imitating Nature.
> It is a sort of constant prisoner dilemma. It is part of the nature of life,
> at the border between the computable and the non-computable. (from 3-1p: the
> sigma_1 leafs of the universal dovetailer versus its "complement" in
> arithmetic).
>
> It is an intrinsic weakness of God,
Only Bruno Marchal would have the gall to write this! I love it! I'm so glad
God has an intrinsic weakness. Kind of de-Gods him/her/it a bit.
> It can't make the devil disappear,
Ecoute, mon ami. Dieu a fait le diable, non? What is all that tra la la about
serpents in gardens etc. Where did this serpent satané arise from? Fallen angel
my foot! God put the snake there on purpose! God has LIED to Man about the
nature and the purpose of the snake. Unless God is not running the show?
K
> but It can help to make it apparent, and locally controllable, when tolerated
> in some proportion, or through representations.
>
> <>[]f (G*)
>
> <><>f (Z1*)
>
> 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/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.
