Re: Holiday Exercise

On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 05 Aug 2016, at 15:01, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On 5/08/2016 10:11 pm, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> On 5/08/2016 9:30 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> Just tell me if you are OK with question 1. The Helsinki guy is told that BOTH cop

Re: Holiday Exercise

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 03 Aug 2016, at 21:01, Brent Meeker wrote: > > >> >> On 8/3/2016 7:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> >>> On 02 Aug 2016, at 20:52, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> >>> On 8/2/2016 6:15 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > It's not

Re: Holiday Exercise

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 02 Aug 2016, at 22:39, Brent Meeker wrote: > > >> >> On 8/2/2016 11:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> Not at all. The existence of the computations is an elementary >>> metatheorem about Robinson Arithmetic, and already a theorem of Pea

Re: Holiday Exercise

In the fictional realm of art, where everything is a lie and the winning theory is the yummiest, all these things: cleopatra personhood intertwinedity river of thought are easily fusionated by some guy and girl playing Joni songs for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrBilBQ1C54 (Apologies

Re: Holiday Exercise

The bickering levels reach a fever pitch and the two teams haven't even reached consensus concerning their status as teams at all in the first place. Then there are the heretics that question not only the match but game theory as well. But the drug is too hard to resist: to bicker... once more...

Re: self (was Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

What if John does not want to engage with the argument? Shouldn't it be his right to say "no"? I'm arriving at the conclusion that his constant replies, negative + insulting as they are, are actually on par with the weird impatient expectation by you guys "that he should just answer in the fuckin

Re: Origin of mathematics

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:16 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 4/22/2015 7:38 PM, PGC wrote: > > > > Quote: > "Both the records and the mathematical objects are human constructions > which are brought into existence by exercises of human will; neither has > any transcendental existence. Both are static,

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 16 Apr 2015, at 06:34, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:33 AM, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > >> LizR wrote: >> >>> On 16 April 2015 at 12:53, Bruce Kellett

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > LizR wrote: > >> On 16 April 2015 at 12:53, Bruce Kellett > > wrote: >> >> LizR wrote: >> >> On 15 April 2015 at 10:15, John Clark >

Re: The MGA revisited

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 6:03 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 4/1/2015 8:34 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 02:48:47AM +0200, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: >> >>> I still don't see what MGA "pumps intuitively and incorrectly", as y

Re: The MGA revisited

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:50:51PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > OK, but so you agree that MGA shows that if comp is true, matter is > > of no use, unless we admit that a complex experience like a human > > dream can supervene on a

Re: The MGA revisited

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 05:17:00AM +0200, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Russell Standish > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I have always disagreed with

Re: The MGA revisited

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 07:28:51AM +0100, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > The ab asurdo is showing computationalism is incompatible with physical > > supervenience, not that it is true. In the end by being forced to accept > > consciousness

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 11:57 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > >> > Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, >> > And I'm perfectly satisfied with that because that is who I really am. > What? Chief of equine relations of everything list? No

Re: The MGA revisited

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > meekerdb wrote: > >> On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> meekerdb wrote: >>> >>> As I said, conterfactual correctness has very little to do with the >>> actual conscious moment. That is given simply by the sequence of actual

Re: The MGA revisited

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:34 PM, LizR wrote: > HmmmI'm not sure where I sit on that. I do feel like some sleight of > hand has been pulled - not intentionally, of course. Perhaps the broken > version might still be conscious, which means that ... eek. That's like > saying Klara's conscious d

Re: The MGA revisited

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 3:16 AM, LizR wrote: > PGC - I think you may have skimmed over too much for me to grasp what > you're saying. But maybe not. So does contradicition arise because you > assume to start with that consciousness is created by computation, then > show that it would also (a

Re: The MGA revisited

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > >> >> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Bruce Kellett > <mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote: >> >> PGC wrote: >> >> W

Re: The MGA revisited

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > PGC wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> Why or how is anybody arguing that problem is generated or solved by "how >> somebody feels about it"? >> >> It's via contradiction/standard reductio: assume conclusion false and >> negation to be true, and from t

Re: The world's most environmentally friendly car

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Telmo Menezes >> wrote: >> >&g

Re: The world's most environmentally friendly car

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 12:34 AM, LizR wrote: > >> Well of course laughing AT people you dislike is a classic bullying >> technique. And then you say "oh come on it was only a joke!" >> >> Yet bullies never make jokes about themselves,

Cosmology from Quantum Potential

Cosmology from quantum potential Ahmed Farag Ali , Saurya Das (Submitted on 11 Apr 2014 (v1 ), last revised 29 Dec 2014 (this version, v3)) It was shown

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 08 Feb 2015, at 13:30, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: > > Bruno, are you familiar with the atheistic (so-called) theologies of Dr. > Eric Steinhart? He's a bright philosopher from William Patterson > University, is the US. He was

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 02 Feb 2015, at 06:37, Samiya Illias wrote: >> >> >> >> On 02-Feb-2015, at 6:12 am, LizR wrote: >> >> On 2 February 2015 at 00:15, Samiya Illias >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> Where do I insult your faith? >> > > I should have phrased it as 'my expr

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Samiya Illias >> wrote: >> >>>

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On 01-Feb-2015, at 1:57 am, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Kierkegaard complained about this with his own Religion, the Christians. > Maybe all religions suffe

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Samiya Illias > wrote: > >> >> >> >> >>> This theologian stays true to more scientific attitude of ignorance

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > > >> This theologian stays true to more scientific attitude of ignorance in >> face of the unknown. >> >> Alhazen described his theology: "I constantly sought knowledge and truth, >> and it became my belief that for gaining access to the

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > > That is due to selective literalism, that you can do with any piece of > literature or code of law, and conveniently blame it on the author. > That's the problem with literalism though. It's always selective, when language is often l

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 27 Jan 2015, at 15:29, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > Hope this video has longer time online than most before being taken down > (apologies to any late readers): > > > https://www.youtube.c

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:15 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > > > > > One must question whether the motives were really “to defend our freedom”, > when in fact the de facto result has been a serious erosion of individual > liberty. At the

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:03 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Ahhh… the dread paradox predicament…. Consider this: there are multiple > truths and each hurts in its own way; it is therefore of some common > comfort that nothing ca

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:53 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Trolling? Applied to your posts that is high praise as some trolls might feel insulted. I respect their feelings in a free internet ;-) You don't provoke or inflame, you're just often o

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:07 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > I like your use of the word calumny. An endless clash of civilization? > Naw! But we do need to defend ourselves against the jihadi, and be able to > retaliate, Piling more revenge killi

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:02 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Platonist Guitar Cowboy > *Se

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:08 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Platonist Guitar Cowboy > *Se

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:51 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > Sent from AOL Mobile Mail > Just stop defending the indefensible islamists and refrain from making > excuses for them. They are all adults and can speak for themselves. They > believe w

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > I am uncomfortable with the plaster of "evil" myself, since what it means > to everyone is too vague. I would define the Jihadis as aggressive, malign, > expansionism. Malign: Evil in na

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:01 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/21/2015 3:49 PM, LizR wrote: > >On 18 Jan 2015, at 20:40, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 1/18/2015 6:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> But observation and personal experience never prove anything. >> >> Spoken like a true Platonist - who nev

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 1:40 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/20/2015 10:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> The more I think about it, the more I doubt that these subjects were >>> simply "abandoned" in an innocent fashion. The problem is that beliefs >>> about fundamental reality are at the foundations

Re: Democracy

Concerning thread: Perhaps I'm wrong and everybody is right. Perhaps it's also ignoring some perceived set of mentalities that get us into these kinds of positions in the first place. Just remember maybe to have a good day whenever we can? And if we can afford it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 7:19 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/16/2015 10:14 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 2:42 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/15/2015 7:33 PM, PGC wrote: >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 8:54

Re: Why was nobody murdered because of this cartoon?

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 2:42 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2015 7:33 PM, PGC wrote: > > > On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 8:54:40 PM UTC+1, Brent wrote: >> >> A fair question. >> > > I'm not so sure about that. The question presupposes ironically that > violence is a justified response to insul

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 3:16 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2015 2:56 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > You seem to have a problem with "Platonism" as linguistic label, which I > say because I assume you value critical thought and scientific method

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:14 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2015 8:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Do you believe in a source of reality beyond the apparent physical > reality we find ourselves in now? > > > No. I don't "believe IN" anything. I entertain hypotheses. > > > Good. But you don't

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 5:03 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/14/2015 4:57 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > > I don't see how uncertainty implies impossibility. If I'm uncertain it > will rain tomorrow, this doesn't imply impossibility of rain for to

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:45 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/14/2015 3:26 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:56 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/14/2015 12:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 1:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 1/14/2015 6:25 AM, Jaso

Re: Democracy

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 13 Jan 2015, at 20:27, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 12 Jan 2015, at 16:55, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: >> >> &

Re: Democracy

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > Also a fact is, depression has a lot of factors, the thing these studies > point out is that there are more depressive states among heavy cannabis > users. > > They do not conclude cannabis is the cause of the depressive state, but > they

Re: Democracy

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 8:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/13/2015 7:34 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Really? On this list? Where? I read criticism of the NSA, of Obama, >> of U.S. foreign policy everywhere. There's a whole industry built around >> it on radio. >> > > That sort of criticism is

Re: Democracy

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 12 Jan 2015, at 16:55, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux > wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> But if you don't want to believ

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:14 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > I share that sentiment; western mass media seems to only care about loss > when it is their loss. > > And, in cases, such as this recent act of terrorism, the reflexive Neocon

Re: Democracy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > 2015-01-12 19:01 GMT+01:00 Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Quentin Anciaux >> wrote: >> >>> Fine,

Re: Democracy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > Fine, like I said believe what you want to believe, I'll stop the > discussion on that subject here... > What discussion? I thought I am advocating the free sale and use of windows. The psychiatrist, of mental health sector which your st

Re: Democracy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > 2015-01-12 18:20 GMT+01:00 Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Quentin Anciaux >> wrote: >> >>> Ok, then fi

Re: Democracy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > Ok, then fine, believe what you want to believe and cannabis is as good as > anything... > If you exaggerate anything you will get extreme results. I don't ask for distortion or faith. The flaw is obvious, even using such terms of such "s

Re: Democracy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > But if you don't want to believe it... fine. What I say is that I'm > relieve to be an ex canabis addict, and that over usage didn't help me at > all and certainly if not the cause did enhance the problem... do what you > want with

Re: Democracy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > 2015-01-12 11:49 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes : > >> >>> So I assume you have no argument here. >>> >>> >>> > You don't have any argument here... the drug market is owned by mafias in > our shared real world, that's a fact... t

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 3:39 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Platonist Guitar Cowboy > *Se

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:04 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/11/2015 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > We can't criticize religions because the churches, with the help of the > main stream atheist (of your type), does not want us to come back to > reasoning at that level, yet. > > > All the atheists

Re: Democracy

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 3:04 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/3/2015 4:15 PM, PGC wrote: > > > > with the latter ultimately escaping our capacity to sort and analyze. > > You mean their assertion of that is clear. It's begging the question to > say it is clear. > > It's clear to everybody who has

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:13 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/19/2014 8:12 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> I don't recall Bruno ever csaying if you don't believe in something then >> you believe in it. >> >> What he's said is that atheists defend/support/reinforce the same >> idea/conception of god that

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 6:26 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > thereby explaining a variety of scientific problems and refuting your >> absolute statement on what

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 3:35 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 Platonist Guitar Cowboy > wrote: > > >Lebowski caricature in Hollywood flick quote above utters perhaps a >> stronger statement: >> "Yeah, well... that's just like your uhmm.. opini

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 2:36 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> >>> "why is there something rather than nothing?" is a badly posed >>> question, >> >> > > >> I don't think so, it may or may not have a answer, nobody knows, but >> it's a perfectly clear u

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 18 Oct 2014, at 02:19, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:12 AM, John Clark wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < >

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:12 AM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Of course, the next distraction is to complain the world ain't murcan >> enough, > > > Ye

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 10:18 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at Platonist Guitar Cowboy > wrote: > > >>>> I ask myself who would INSIST on using the word "God" (and not some >>>>> other word) >>>>> >>>&g

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 16 Oct 2014, at 16:39, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:44 AM, LizR wrote: > >> Sounds like doublethink to mewhich was of course a virtue and a >> neces

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:46 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> I ask myself who would INSIST on using the word "God" (and not some >>> other word) >>> >> >> > Which one? I have suggested an other word, like the ONE, but you did >> not reply. >>

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:56 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Lol, why is somebody, that prides themselves spamming, in the driver's >> seat of posing questions now?

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 1:12 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 Platonist Guitar Cowboy > >> >> > For example, say you state after some mystical experience, that you met >> a god that told you to write down his message. If your god insists in the >> t

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:44 AM, LizR wrote: > Sounds like doublethink to mewhich was of course a virtue and a > necessity if you lived on Airstrip One. > Right. If I remember correctly, peculiar machine is inaccurate but not necessarily inconsistent. So you have to doublethink in consisten

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:28 AM, meekerdb wrote: > > I works with "house" and "Brent" too. What's curious is that failing to > believe in anything implies that you do believe in it. I suppose it goes > along with the spirit of "everything". If I can think of it clearly enough > to fail to beli

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:00 AM, meekerdb wrote: > Bruno seems to think that if you fail to believe in the existence of > Santa Claus you must have a definite idea of what "Santa Claus" refers to > and therefore you do believe in Santa Claus. A curious inference for a > logician. > That's just

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:42 PM, John Mikes wrote: > I read Bruno's ID about* theology* some times - never really comprehended > it. > Then I suggest a standard dictionary or to google/wiki the term, where you'll find that Bruno did not invent the term, nor did he imbue it with some special inte

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:56 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > > > which again confirm my point (you know the one which trigger your >> bot-like answer). >> > > If you don't like my bot-like answer then stop making the exact same > bot-like accusation; I give the stupidity prize to "Atheism, as I know

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > > No. Verses were noted down and memorised as revealed. > What if somebody human made a mistake here, like all of us from time to time? > Towards the end of the prophetic mission, when all the verses had been > revealed, the Heavenly

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 4:54 AM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On 14-Oct-2014, at 12:51 am, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Is there something like an internet publicity chapter in the Qu'ran (I > assume there must be some t

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 5:33 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/13/2014 9:26 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 2:17 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 10/12/2014 2:35 PM, LizR wrote: >> >>> I imagine most philosophers don't think

Re: I can tolerate anything except the outgroup

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Telmo Menezes >> wrote: >> >>> >

Re: generalizations_of_islam

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 6:48 PM, John Clark wrote: > Not exactly. I prefer that my beliefs be true, or at least as true as I > can get them, but others have a different preference. For the religious the > most important part of a belief isn't it's truth but how good it makes you > feel or how wel

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 6:56 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > You confirm all the time the theory that atheists are the best defenders >> of the christians dogma. >> > > Wow, calling a guy known for disliking religion religious, never heard > t

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > If you were a Muslim you would not doubt the wisdom and knowledge of the > author of the Quran. Rather, you would try to understand why is it so. > And if cows had wings, they could open their own airline. The above is not an argument.

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On 12-Oct-2014, at 10:12 pm, John Clark wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Samiya Illias > wrote: > > > > Would you like specific explanations to the verses you've quoted below? >> > > Not necessary, those quotations spea

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 2:17 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/12/2014 2:35 PM, LizR wrote: > >> I imagine most philosophers don't think about God because God isn't a >> very good explanation for anything. You just have to ask "where did God >> come from?" so see that you've just been diverted away fro

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Samiya Illias >> wrote: >> >>> >

Re: I can tolerate anything except the outgroup

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Telmo Menezes >> wrote: >> >>> >

Re: Nanoscopy

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Amazing. Can't help to bet on a substitution level, perhaps ... Wait to > see the DNA or RNA polymerases in action, if that is possible? > Lol, first thought I had was "hmm, substitution level? Damn it!" and thought about the list and had t

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > So, for me personally, the scripture takes precedence. > Samiya > Thank you for being honest. Maybe you might note this on your blog as an introduction to save peoples' time in their personal searches: I thought you were trying to show that

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > Hmm. Please read this blogpost and let me know if this meets your > 'demonstrating > factual accuracy in this sense here, of course.': > > http://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2014/06/dhu-al-qarnayn-polar-regions-of-earth.html?m=1 > > You

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > On 09-Oct-2014, at 8:06 pm, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Samiya Illias > wrote: > >> >> On 09-Oct-2014, at 11:30 a

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Samiya Illias wrote: > > On 09-Oct-2014, at 11:30 am, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 9, 2014, Samiya Illias > wrote: > >> What is your position on teleology? Do you think that there is a cause or >> purpose for everything? >> Also, wha

Re: I can tolerate anything except the outgroup

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < > multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Telmo Menezes >> wrote: >> >>

Nanoscopy

Breaking diffraction barrier in fluorescence microscopy: From: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOVTS1lzRLQ >From Guardian: In what has become known as nanoscopy, scientists visualise the pathways of individual molecules inside living cells. They can see how molecules create synapses between nerv

Re: I can tolerate anything except the outgroup

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > I think this is a quite interesting read: > > http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ > > It made me think of the everything list. We clearly have members of the > conventional tribes (red, blue and g

Re: generalizations_of_islam

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:20 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/6/2014 9:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > and in machine, and in the mystics, that is the correct use of the term. > It is very reasonable, and it prevents at the start the confusion between > the serious research and the political/socia

Re: generalizations_of_islam

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:10 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/5/2014 10:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 03 Oct 2014, at 22:30, meekerdb wrote: > > The problem with theories of everything is that they are either too > difficult to test or have been found to conflict with observation. So > almos

Re: FW: generalizations_of_islam

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:59 AM, LizR wrote: > At least you grasp all this stuff. I can't even be wrong with authority. > I don't grasp it. But that is why it is fun to rant when appropriate, especially when it feels like the same tired old cultural songs. -- You received this message because

  1   2   3   4   5   >