> On 30 Apr 2020, at 05:05, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 8:50:38 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 11:20:37 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 27 Apr 2020, at 14:36, Lawrence Crowell <[email protected] <>> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 4:14:45 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> > On 23 Apr 2020, at 06:53, Samiya Illias <[email protected] <>> wrote: >> > >> > If the All-Mighty God accepts me in The Kingdom of The Hereafter, I trust >> > He will explain to us our roles, responsibilities, perks and privileges. >> >> OK. >> >> No it is not OK. Religion is based on the idea that truth is handed down by >> a divine authority. > > > It comes from the insight of the greeks that Truth is an authority we better > should not hide, even if we cannot define it. > > It is related to the fact that you cannot put your hand in the fire, and > relativise what is happening. > > > > Theology and science are in dialectic opposition. Monotheistic religions > present a God that is really nothing more than a mystical form of Orwell's > Big Brother. The whole business amounts to various enormous scams that > control people. Christianity was the first, where the Hebrew God was co-opted > into a Hellenic form with ideas of that God having been a man who sacrificed > Himself to Himself, was resurrected to meet Himself in heaven, all because > the first humans were deceived by a talking snake. If that is not a mythic > narrative I do not know what is. Islam is a bit more straightforward, but > Allah as presented in much of the Koran is an infinite mad defect, a sort of > infinitely projected Hitler, who is ripe to met out vengeance and eternal > punishment, and admonishes His followers to imitate this on Earth. There have > been follow on relations, in particular Mormonism. That is a unique form of > madness IMO. > > I've studied Mormonism seriously, and I know Mormons personally since I > reside in Utah. The theology of Mormonism is totally ridiculous, but Mormons, > by and large, are among the nicest human beings I have ever met. AG > > In many ways I prefer the ideas of Taoism and Buddhism, which like monotheism > reduced many gods to one or a few, but go an additional step further and have > the 0-god. The Tao has features parallel to the quantum vacuum, and with what > I am working with entanglement and gauge theory I think energy and > entanglement form a wholeness that is similar to the "Qi." With these at > least there is no Orwellian terror being in the sky we have to fall to our > knees before. > > I've also studied Buddhism seriously, and at its core it's just another form > of this-world denialism, which I find offensive. For Buddhists, the physical > world is an illusion (which should find praise with Bruno!).
All I say is that physicalism (not physics) is wrong once we believe in, say, darwinism. It is not this-world denialism, it is only this-world-as-primary-ontological which is questioned. I keep my personal opinion for myself, and it has always fluctuated, but, yes, I consider that there are far more evidences in favour of mechanism than in favour for a primitively physical universe. The main evidence is quantum mechanics, whose qualitative (many world/histories), and its more quantitative modal aspect (quantum logic) has been derived (by myself) a long time before I knew anything about the conceptual problem of quantum mechanics. > And the Qi energy? Another defacto ether theory, which physics is > schizophrenic about --in the sense that it keeps arising again and again in > different forms, the latest being a scalar field, aka the Higgs field. AG Are you taking about the taoist QI, or Quantum Information? Bruno > > If we humans were really the intelligent life form we pretend to be we would > have gotten rid of the monotheistic beliefs at least a century ago. > > > > > > LC > > > > >> Religion claims to have the ultimate truth, or THE TRUTH, > > > Only when a tyran steal the domain to those who can remain serious and modest > on the complex foundational issues. > > Dont confuse god, the object of theological study, and god, the object of > naïve popular fairy tales, especially when it is mixed with state and > politics. (The genuine blasphemy). > > Yes, I know that we have to backtrack about 1500 years to find serious > studies, but if you study the history of religion, you can understand that > serious theologian have continue to exist, although usually hiding their > theories, or presenting them in a way so that they are not immediately send > at stake. > > > > >> and we are supposed to wait patiently for a great day of revelation. > > > Religion has something to do with personal experience, which are usually > forbidden once the religion is stolen by politics, let us say. > > > > > >> For most of us this will come after death, where if we have done all the >> right things, according to various scriptures, > > Of course in science there is no scripture, except papers and treatises. > > > >> we will come to know the ultimate Truth and live in eternal bliss. > > Of course those terms must be defined before we conclude anything, and such a > conclusion would only be conditional on some theory. For example, if we > assume mechanism, we cannot assume consistently materialism. (That is not > entirely obvious, but I got this in the 1970s, at a time where most people > told me that this was not original, and indeed that was understood by the > greeks already). > > > > >> For those who are errant they get to spend eternity in a pit of endless fire >> where they suffer until the end of time --- but somehow this God still loves >> us. > > > That god is omniscient and omnipotent, which is logically impossible. Since > St-Thomas, even the (educated) christians does not take any of this > literally. I am aware that American Evangelist does, or at least fall they > do, but apparently it is used only for making the people offering planes and > money to the boss. The con-artistry is just obvious. > > You can use such argument to defeat the literalist. Scared-text literalism is > only a tool for propagating atheism. > > > >> >> I don't know about anyone else, but I call this a big hustle. These >> religions were schemes concocted by various religious and political con-men >> as a way people could be controlled and society choreographed according to >> the wishes of an ecclesiastical class. > > > Absolutely. That is why I insist that theology comes back at the academy, > where doubts, critics, alternate theories, and research are encouraged. > > > >> Both Christianity and Islam suffer from this problem, they are huge >> social-psychological cons played against people, and where these schemes >> have a lot of staying power. They are sorts of neural-brain memes that >> lodges themselves in minds and are difficult to remove. > > > Like all propaganda. It is to theology what astrology is to astronomy. > > > >> >> I read a translation of the Koran after 9/11. I would say my general comment >> is that if this were first published now, with crisp new copies available at >> bookstores and Amazon, the reviewers would be calling it the screed of a >> complete lunatic. > > > What is lunatic is to read such text like if there were scientific attempt to > understand things. Before Al Ghazali, many muslims were quite open to this, > and that is why they decide to come back to the greeks and translated their > text, leading to science, but they will not benefit from it, as the dark > mixing with power will come back and prevail. > > > > > >> The Mecca Koran, which is thought to have been written when Muhammed was in >> Mecca with his few followers, is relatively inoffensive and reads a bit like >> Psalms or Proverbs. The second Medina Koran was allegedly written after they >> got their butts kicked out of Mecca, and this part is pure insanity. > > OK. > > >> >> We really should be done with these silly things. > > It is easy. Let us stop claim that science has solved the ontological > problem, like materialist do (believer in primary mater). > > > > >> These are based on mythic narratives concerning ideas from the ancient world. > > That is not entirely true. Hypatia taught mathematics and theology in > Alexandria, still around 300/400. But we can see the radicals taking > position, and she will be murdered by them. > > You just cannot compare Plotinus and Proclus to the reading of any > sacred-fairy tales book. Those scared text are honorable witnessing of the > past, but no-one would claim they even address the problem. > > > > >> They may have made sense then, but really some education and thought should >> indicate how utterly ineffective monotheist religion is as telling us >> anything really meaningful or useful. > > Monotheism is the religion view of monism. At least Einstein was aware of > that, and explained that without it, he would not even have searched for a > his general relativity theory. > > Monotheism is the grandmother of the theory of of everything, or of the > insight we should unify our knowledge in a coherent way. The theism aspect is > in the modesty, which enforces a constant listening to a ll arguments, even > the most critical, especially the most critical (unless refuted of course). > > > > >> It is a load of nonsense. We do not sit with slack jaw waiting for some >> great Santa Claus or fairy godmother to come and reveal ALL to us. Instead >> we think, observe, measure, rethink and … , repeat, in order to know what is >> truthful within the limits and tentative certitude of science. > > There is no certitude in science. Just hypotheses/theories and degrees of > plausibility. It does not matter so much in applied natural science, but it > matters a lot in applied fundamental science, notably by understanding that > in religion only the con men claims some truth. > > By leaving theology in the fairy tale literature, we give power to the tyran > and to argument of authority in religion, but also we make science looking > like if it was an alternative to religion, that is, we make science itself > into a pseudo-religion. > > That separates eventually the whole human science from exact science, and > that makes them both inhuman and inexact. > > The problem is not God. The problem is that some people conclude that God > does not exist when they find a contradiction in some theory of God. That > would be like a scientists along that Earth does not exist, because the idea > of infinitely many turtles does not make sense. > > In science we very rarely abandon a concept. We just improve it through new > theory. > > I the greek theology, the starting God was the natural numbers, then the > world of ideas, and then Aristotle added a physical primary universe. Today, > se know or should know that such a primary physical universe is contradicted > by Mechanism (even with just the amount of mechanism necessitate to make > sense of Darwin). > Here the problem is that those who claim to not have a religion appears to > believe in Aristotle theology, the belief in a primary physical universe. > This, as I have explained here, is just not working at all, unless you > eliminate consciousness from the picture. > > Unfortunately, there are still many people who are confusing the strong > evidences for the physical laws with evidences for a primary physical > universe, or for physicalism. That’s just wrong. That confuses physics and > metaphysics. That is Aristotle act of faith in his metaphysics, and a sort of > anti-platonic provocation, and misunderstanding. Of course people love it, as > they love ontological commitments, as it seems reassuring I guess, but that > is the kind of pseudo-religious wishful thinking that is not tolerated when > we work with the scientific attitude. > > We will leave the Middle-Age when theology is back, probably as an option in > advanced mathematical logic and computer science (even non-mechanist position > can be get more precise ny making precise the digital mechanist position. We > know that the modal logic G and G* remains sound, but some can lose > completeness, like “being true in all *transitive* models of ZF”. (Being true > in *all* models of ZF is just provability for which G and G* are complete in > their respective roles). > > Bruno > > > > >> >> LC >> >> >> > He didn’t create this world without purpose, >> >> >> So let us search the purpose, and try theories. The notion of purpose is not >> an easy notion. >> >> >> >> > I’m sure there is a greater purpose to our eternal life! >> >> >> So let us do the research work, as this is not obvious, although a pleasant >> idea (but that is reason to be careful on this, especially when we are still >> on the terrestrial plane, where modesty is not so much an option). >> >> When you assume a greater purpose you need to take into account that some >> people will borrow an ersatz greater purpose for terrestrial use, and that >> this can eventually hide for long the genuine higher purpose of the higher >> self. The machine already understand that some (religious) truth go only >> without saying. >> >> Those who trust the great Goddess leaves the advertising to Her.The genuine >> mystic stays mute, or propose some theory and reason conditionally. >> >> Bruno >> >> >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > 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 view this discussion on the web visit >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/DEEC3CCB-0CE7-45F9-9AED-75285CFD90E4%40gmail.com >> > >> > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/DEEC3CCB-0CE7-45F9-9AED-75285CFD90E4%40gmail.com>. >> > >> > <image0.jpeg> >> > >> > >> > >> >> On 23-Apr-2020, at 6:05 AM, [email protected] <> wrote: >> >> >> >> So, if you have pleased, the All-Mighty, and are ushered in to Janah, and >> >> you are given permission, what would you do for your first year there? >> > >> > -- >> > 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 view this discussion on the web visit >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/DEEC3CCB-0CE7-45F9-9AED-75285CFD90E4%40gmail.com >> > >> > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/DEEC3CCB-0CE7-45F9-9AED-75285CFD90E4%40gmail.com>. >> > >> >> >> -- >> 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 view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/89cbc25a-b75e-4c9f-8600-343a09d8e0af%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/89cbc25a-b75e-4c9f-8600-343a09d8e0af%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/7ad680a3-e8d5-4545-b1cc-1a7f75cde0f0%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/7ad680a3-e8d5-4545-b1cc-1a7f75cde0f0%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/AF4230B0-BD72-4584-B82D-37813BE5F5E9%40ulb.ac.be.
