I, for one, don't feel particularly motivated to engage with Pat's arguments at the moment. Like others who've been around here for a while, I've already done that. This has nothing to do with the discussability of Pat's theses, it has a lot more to do with me and where I am at the moment.
Quite a while ago, I had a pretty intense discussion with Pottsie about similar issues, which helped me to develop my position on monism/ panentheism, into which category I place Pat's arguments. I stress this is my personal position: Monism is irrefutable, but I can't see how it brings us a whit farther. To give one example; for monists, free will is an illusion. But it is a perfect illusion. Ok, but how is a perfect illusion distinguishable from the reality? God is in Pat's theory, God is in my rejection of his theory. God is the belief of the theist and the non-belief of the atheist. God is the mover, the moving and the moved. Ultimately God is everything, and God is nothing. "I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together... Semolina pilchard climbing up the Eiffel tower ... I am the walrus" Francis On 26 Jan., 14:11, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25 Jan, 21:43, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Pat's an old mate. Ian's an old mate. Better add Molly or I'll have > > to come out as gay. We all need 'pulling up' from time to time. Not > > easy to do and often falls flat, especially here when someone says > > something sensible about me. Pat's been boring me of late, but then > > like Ian I'm a pretty atheist, empirical 'the world is real' kind of > > guy. These things happen. Questions about extending dialogue rather > > than just getting it on ground we like are difficult. We might be > > better taking some time off with the Brazilian community in Gort, > > Ireland, for a real change. We may just be getting to used to each > > other. > > Sorry to hear I'm boring you. I think you hit the nail on the head > with your last line. I'm not really saying anything NEW. And > repeating it in front of newcomers, I can understand could well be > boring those who 'have heard it all before'. Perhaps it's time for me > to spend more time writing my book and leave you all to discuss > everything and solve nothing, as that's what seems to be happening, in > my opinion. We each seem to hold our own opinions and no one is > convincing anyone else of much of anything. Is that dialogue? Is it > even interesting? No wonder you're bored. ;-) > > > > > On 25 Jan, 16:17, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 2010/1/25 Molly <[email protected]> > > > > > I, for one, welcome Pat's ideas and knowledge - all extensive. Like a > > > > breath of fresh air in this group, as he extends the boundaries of > > > > thinking with his kind treatment. > > > > I welcome Pat's ideas and knowledge too, which I hope was clear. That > > > wasn't > > > my issue. > > > > Ian- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
