On 3/1/2015 1:39 PM, LizR wrote:
If Bruno uses God to mean an origin, perhaps he should call it 0 (zero) or { } - the
empty set?
I think he wants to mean the underlying basis of everything, not just a beginning, but a
sustaining basis - and he doesn't believe in set theory or doesn't believe it is basis
enough. As Kronecker said, "Die ganze Zahl schuf der liebe Gott, alles Übrige ist
Menschenwerk." At a gut level I think he wants to poke the eye of some atheists who
rejected his thesis. Otherwise he could easily use "The One" or aperion or quintessence
other theologically neutral terms.
I am not sure what evidence there is for a creator, but even if there is such evidence
that doesn't answer the question at the top of the thread - "Why is there something
rather than nothing?" It just changes it to "Why is there a creator?"
He thinks arithmetic is logically necessary and therefore whatever satisfies its existence
predicate is what exists.
Brent
Logic: The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the limitations and
incapacities of the human misunderstanding.
--- Ambrose Bierce
--
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.
