Bruno, You seem to know so much about that Artifact "GOD" and that other one: our "subconscious". At least you say so about "HER". Why do you assign the topic to our Solar system to time the 'full answer' to at least 2 years (Solar, I suppose, otherwise "YEAR" has no meaning).
We talk in human terms/ideas/concepts/logic.I left it open to the BEYOND. I agree ith your 'natural' world-image. JM On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > On 29 Dec 2016, at 08:09, Torgny Tholerus wrote: > > > > On 2016-12-28 23:56, John Mikes wrote: > > I do not intend to participate in the discussion of this topic fpr more > than one reason: > 1. I am agnostic, so I just DO NOT KNOW what (who?) that "GOD" may be. > > > *You just have to ask God what she is. Then she will answer. But it may > take two years to get the full answer.* > > 1,A: is God a PERSON? (Or: many persons?) > > > *Yes, God is a person. In the same way as your own personality is build > up by trillions of brain cells, then Gods personality is build up by > billions of human beeings.* > > > > The human conception of God can be said to be build up to trillions of > human brain cells, but that is not God, given that by definition God is the > primary cause of the Universe, and you would not say that the physical > universe's primary cause is the human brain cells. > > Of course the phsyical universe as we know it is also a human brain > construct, but if we assume mechanism, we can show that it is a "Turing > machine" constructs. the machine themselves are realized in arithmetic, as > all logicians know since 1931. > > > > > > 1,C Did He/She/It originate the World? (what draws the question: How > was God originated?) > > > *No, she did not originate the world. She is a result of the natural > selection.* > > > > Well, you are not talking about God as the reason of the Universe and all > realities, but on the human conception of the universe. We could say > likewise that the human theory of natural selection is also only a > successful meme of the human brain. The physical universe can be explained > away in the same manner. > > Natural selection need Mechanism to work, but with mechanism, the physical > universe cease to exist in any primitive way. So your explanation becomes > circular or wrong. > > > > > > > > > 3. A am also ignorant about my (or anyone else's) Subconscious. Have you > ever M E T > yours? I figure it must be something limitless of which we fathom only > a bit. > Or is all t his rather fitting the Superconscious? we have some idea > about our 'conscious'? > > > *I have talked with my subconscious. I do it every time I pray. And > sometimes my subconscious answer me. And sometimes my subconscious talks > directly to me, she reminds me when I have forgotten something.* > > > > The subconscious can take the form of person in dreams, but I would not > consider it as a person in the waking life, it is part of your own > personhood, I would say. > > > > > > > > 4. An immortal person? Cf. Wagner's Gotterdammerung. > > > *No, God is not immortal. But God will live much longer than a human > being. God will *live *as long as the mankind exists.* > > 5. "Supernatural powers"? did you ever define the "natural ones" (beyond > our ever changing concept of a system of our "physical" explanations? > > > *No, God have no supernatural powers. God can only do what a human being > can do.* > > > With a non-standard definition of God, as this contradict the general > definition of the notion. In this list people have used the word "God" as > the cause or reason (not necessary physical, perhaps physical, it will > depend on the theory) of reality and realities. > > We can reject a definition as being too much precise (like God = the > christian God), but we have to keep the basic of the definition: the reason > of everything, including consciousness and matter (real or appearances). > > You do seem have some faith in the second God of Aristotle: a physical > universe. But with mechanism, both God of Aristotle (the Creator and the > Creation) stop making sense. Only Plato abstract notion continue to make > sense, and indeed, Plato took it to Pythagoras, mainly, and we are driven > again toward it after the discovery of the universal number/machine. > > Mechanism is incompatible with both supernatural powers and ... natural > powers. Those who use the mind-brain identity link attribute without saying > some supernatural power to nature, by making nature able to select > computation(s) in arithmetic, and make all other computations into zombie. > > Bruno > > > > > > > John M > > > -- > Torgny > > -- > 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 https://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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
