On 01 Mar 2015, at 20:16, Samiya Illias wrote:
On 01-Mar-2015, at 8:40 pm, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
On 01 Mar 2015, at 13:01, Samiya Illias wrote:
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 28 Feb 2015, at 19:33, Samiya Illias wrote:
On 28-Feb-2015, at 11:00 pm, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 27 Feb 2015, at 12:56, Samiya Illias wrote:
Why don't you just call it One with a capital O
Because I use "One" for Plotinus first Hypostase. I use God, for
the general notion, used by most philosophers and comparative
theologians.
God / Allah (The Deity) are terms used for a being worthy of
worship (loving obedience).
That might be true for those who meet God, and strictly speaking
it go without saying. But it might lead to catastrophes when said
by anyone, because you can't really name God so as to be clear
about what to obey to. Cerfeul, as the trick is ,for some tyrant,
to make believe he is the intermediate. That happens very often.
Does the One/God of Comp mean as such?
I suspect so, but with that important proviso, above.
From what I've gathered from your explanations, it simply points
to an origin, not the Creator of the origin(s). Is that correct?
I would say that it points on the permanent immutable perfection,
say, at the origin and end of all origins and ends. It is out of
time and space, and explains the reason of the perception of
origin, time, space, etc
I think "God" is more a semantic reason than an "origin". It is
not omnipotent. Its perfection makes it unable to cope with many
things, including matter. There is a trade-of between knowledge
and ability to change/move. God can oscillate between knowing all
things, but then unable to change anything, or forgetting and then
being able to change and move.
Well, though you can refer to it with whatever word seems
appropriate to you, however I would suggest that you do not use of
the term Allah, as the concept of the term is a perfect, perfectly-
able, perfectly and constantly all-aware, all-seeing, all-hearing,
perfectly-commanding and perfectly-governing being, in control of
everything
So why worry?
If I decide to call it Allah, why would you doubt that this is
Allah will?
and not sharing its sovereignty or command with anyone.
I agree 100%. That's the way of the Gods, and the God, or Goddess.
But that is exactly what many humans do not seem to grasp, when
they believe in prophets and fairy tales. They invent, I'm afraid,
intermediate between God and humans, for political purpose. I am
not sure at all, but it does look like blasphemy.
Allah alone is worthy of worship,
Well, if by Allah you mean God, I certainly agree, but I don't
think any human has a monopoly of a name, as "The God" (which I
think is Allah in arab) has no name.
Suggesting me not to use Allah seems a little weird, then.
The descriptions that you have given of your discovery is something
that set in motion the process by initiating 0 and 1 and then is no
longer involved in the process of creation, forgets, unable to act,
and so on.
I think that you are not entirely correct on this. Both from a 3p pov,
and the 1p pov, although what you say might make a bit more sense from
the 3p view.
Yet, in the 3p view, the initiating (by zero, successor) is easier for
us to connective like it was a sort of procedure working in time. But
this is due to our limitation, and if this would be true, (like it is
in intuitionistic mathematics), it is provably false in classical
mathematics, where the truth of a sentence is not related to anything
temporal, and indeed escape entirely the realm of procedure.
Then an internal dynamics appears in the 1-views, distributed in the
whole arithmetical reality, in a way which is beyond the procedure too.
So, it makes sense in the arithmetical realm, (which is provably
enough when we assume computationalism) to say that such a truth, like
God, is present everywhere and acts everywhere. It is open if it has
will, per se, but we have already suggestion that it acquires
personality when restricted to machines, or intermediates non-machine
entities (which exists provably in arithmetic).
That is not the concept of Allah in Islam, nor of God in most
religions.
I am not sure why you seem so sure about it. If you are correct, given
that there is only one God, and that this remains true when we assume
computationalism, if you are correct that would make Islam incoherent
with computationalism. I tend to believe the contrary, a priori. Only
a too much literal interpretation of the Quran would make it
incoherent with computationalism. Many muslims scholars can agree with
this, at least this is what I get from my reading of them.
That is why I suggested that perhaps what you've discovered is not
God but rather an origin, a primary creation of sorts, may be.
I'm afraid that you are imposing implicitly a constructive reading of
mathematics. This is like saying that there is only the third
hypostase (the first person, the universal soul, S4Grz, []p & p, etc.).
The making of the whole reality (physical and non physical) would be a
construction by the first person. This is too much idealistic a
priori. It is true for the physical reality, but not for God.
Feel free to call it whatever you like, I was just sharing my
thoughts on the matter.
Thanks. No problem. I hope I am not shocking you, but with science, it
is unavoidable to not be shocked by the analysis of the consequences
of our beliefs. We can never know them in advance, provably so once
those beliefs encompass the universal Turing machinery, and does not
add too much non-Turing emulable "fairy tale" things.
I just push computationalism to its limit. Only strong atheism, or
physicalist anti-theism, together with literalism, seems to be
problematic with the idea that our bodies supports our soul in a
Turing emulable way. There is a problem also with any use of what go
beyond us, to influence the other. Only the One without a name can do
that and nobody can do that in Its behalf.
Bruno
Samiya
and all else is creation,
Or emanation. OK. We can look at the detail later, as you know I
think the neoplatonist muslims, jews and christians are less wrong
than the Aristotelians. They are less numerous too.
and even the mightiest / loftiest of creation submits humbly to
Allah. Use of the word Allah for a concept less-powerful may not
be a good idea.
Are you saying that God is less-powerful than Allah?
Then, given what I mean by "God", you should encourage me to use
Allah. Logically.
And then, IF I use Allah, what makes you think it could be possible
that it is not Allah's wish, given that Allah controls everything?
I am not so sure I understand you fully, Samiya. I certainly
understand that you might not appreciate the doubt about taking
literally the talk of the prophets (despite we both agree they are
human).
I understand also the hardness to accept that in theology we might
have chosen the wrong path, since the sixth century in Occident and
the eleventh century in the Middle-East.
I thought you might be pleased with such terming, but I can also
understand the worry. No problem, I will use, according to the
context the more neutral "One", or "The Truth", or "The ultimate
reality", or simply "God" (the common term used in comparative
theology) and not call It/He/She Allah, nor Brahma, nor Tao, nor ....
You are right that we cannot comprehend it, but sometimes you do
behave like you do comprehend it, somehow, it seems to me.
All Names miss the One.
I think. Currently.
Bruno
Samiya
But it is a very complex subject, and I am extrapolating probably
too much. You might read the book by Brian Hines "Return to the
One" (subtitled "Plotinus' guide To God-Realization"). It is not a
scholar, but it fits rather well with the machine's talk, but to
verify this we need to climb that Mountain, and if I remember well
we are still learning lacing the shoes ....
About this, can you tell me if you have a idea of what a set is?
And what a subset is? How many subsets has the set {0, 1}?
I hope you indulge my math teaching vocation ... For the greeks,
mathematics is the preliminary study of theology.
Bruno
Samiya
Bruno
Samiya
On 27-Feb-2015, at 4:23 pm, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 26 Feb 2015, at 21:52, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/26/2015 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Fro the greek, the existence of God is a quasi-triviality,
because God, by definition, is the reality that we search.
Then the real question is what is the nature of God? A
person? A physical thing? A mathematical thing? A first
principle, etc.
The Greeks had many concepts of the basis of reality which
were not assumed to be gods, i.e. persons. Anaximander called
it "aperion". From Wikipedia:
"Greek philosophy entered a high level of abstraction,
adopting apeiron as the origin of all things, because it is
completely indefinite. This is a further transition from the
previous existing mythical way of thought to the new rational
way of thought which is the main characteristic of the
archaic period (8th-6th century BC)."
So I reiterate my objection that using "God" is not only
obfuscating your avowed meaning it is also wrong to say it's
what the Greeks meant by the basis of reality.
Yes, it is a key moment in the greek theology, where at the
beginning, God was considered as finite, and the infinite was
confused with the indefinite, and almost an insult. Later they
make the infinite (apeiron) into a possible attribute of the
ONE, and reserve the indefinite ofr the notion of bad, or
matter.
If you don't like the term "God" I will use "Allah". The main
point about God is that it has no name, so *any* name is
wrong. I did not use God, except in a reply which has lead us
to that infinite useless vocabulary discussion. God is just
the most common quasi-name (pointer).
I made clear what I meant, and the important point is the
coming back to the scientific attitude in theology, which is
typically concerned with soul, afterlife, (re)incarnation,
origin of universe, transcendence, truth, non-nameable, etc.
It is the ONE of Parmenides and Plotinus, and it is not
distinguishable from arithmetical truth, in case we are machine.
BTW, sometimes ago, you suggested here to promote my work to
Templeton. How is that going?
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 [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.
--
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
[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.
--
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.
--
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 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 [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.
