Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

-- 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@googlegrou

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 29 Jun 2014, at 23:19, Kim Jones wrote: On 29 Jun 2014, at 7:19 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: I think it is more related with ego-psychological issue than with the matter subject. Bruno Precisely. Which is why you will understand that to respond any further to the belligerence of hi

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 28 Jun 2014, at 14:00, Kim Jones wrote: On 28 Jun 2014, at 5:39 am, John Clark wrote: Given that your average 6th grader knows far more about the universe than he ever did why in hell should I read Plotinus?? Yes, kids have the ability to understand a lot more than we give them cre

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 30 Jun 2014, at 01:20, meekerdb wrote: On 6/29/2014 1:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note that it is an arithmetical fact that arithmetic emulates all simulations. Saying that some of those are more real than other is a metaphysical assumption, and MGA shows that it is a gap-of-the- god

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 29 Jun 2014, at 19:24, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> I care about the notion behind. Call it the "ONE" >> Let's call it the "BULLSHIT". > Why not. But it can be confusing. I don't see how "THE BULLSHIT" is more confusing than "THE ONE

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 29 Jun 2014, at 12:22, David Nyman wrote: On 29 June 2014 05:47, LizR wrote: t's the "materialist hat" (I'm not sure which colour it is). Calling "bullshit!" on comp and similar ideas without stopping to understand them seems to stem from a religious belief in materialism (Bill Taylor

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: "I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

gt;>> I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about >>> science, had to say on this subject: >>> >>> "I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've >>> been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

o about science, had to say on this subject: "I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledg

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

fic >>> method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of >>> scientific theories. >>> >> >> I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about >> science, had to say on this subject: >> >> "I am

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: "I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 30 June 2014 15:50, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/29/2014 10:41 AM, John Clark wrote: > > Only if a change in your quantum state causes a discontinuity in your > consciousness, but your quantum state changes hundreds of thousands of > millions of billions of trillions of times a second. And by the w

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 6/29/2014 10:41 AM, John Clark wrote: Only if a change in your quantum state causes a discontinuity in your consciousness, but your quantum state changes hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of trillions of times a second. And by the way, what does a "discontinuity in your consciousn

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

heories. >> > > I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, > had to say on this subject: > > "I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been > an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellect

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 30 June 2014 11:20, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/29/2014 1:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Note that it is an arithmetical fact that arithmetic emulates all > simulations. Saying that some of those are more real than other is a > metaphysical assumption, and MGA shows that it is a gap-of-the-god ty

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 6/29/2014 1:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note that it is an arithmetical fact that arithmetic emulates all simulations. Saying that some of those are more real than other is a metaphysical assumption, and MGA shows that it is a gap-of-the-god type of assumption. But it is not a physical fa

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> On 29 Jun 2014, at 7:19 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > I think it is more related with ego-psychological issue than with the matter > subject. > > Bruno > Precisely. Which is why you will understand that to respond any further to the belligerence of his posts is merely an invitation to do

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

> > > in effect the non-cloning theorem prevents saying "yes" to the doctor if > you insist on there being no discontinuity in your consciousness. > Only if a change in your quantum state causes a discontinuity in your consciousness, but your quantum state changes hundreds of thousands of millions

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> I care about the notion behind. Call it the "ONE" >>> >> >> >> Let's call it the "BULLSHIT". >> > > > Why not. But it can be confusing. > I don't see how "THE BULLSHIT" is more confusing than "THE ONE". > It looks like according to you

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

two about science, had to say on this subject: "I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have.

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 26 Jun 2014, at 05:51, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:44, meekerdb wrote: On 6/25/2014 8:38 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:25, meekerdb wrote: On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb wrote: On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: Now I know Bruno will say

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 29 Jun 2014, at 04:26, Kim Jones wrote: On 29 Jun 2014, at 4:13 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: As long as quasi-rationalists like you mock the theological field, and prevent any seriousness there, it will remain in the province of the bullshit vendors. The trouble with "thinkers" like Cl

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 29 June 2014 05:47, LizR wrote: > t's the "materialist hat" (I'm not sure which colour it is). Calling > "bullshit!" on comp and similar ideas without stopping to understand them > seems to stem from a religious belief in materialism (Bill Taylor on the > FOAR forum is another example of this)

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 29 June 2014 14:26, Kim Jones wrote: > > > On 29 Jun 2014, at 4:13 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > As long as quasi-rationalists like you mock the theological field, and > prevent any seriousness there, it will remain in the province of the > bullshit vendors. > > The trouble with "thinkers

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> On 29 Jun 2014, at 4:13 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > As long as quasi-rationalists like you mock the theological field, and > prevent any seriousness there, it will remain in the province of the bullshit > vendors. The trouble with "thinkers" like Clark is that they are really liars to th

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 27 Jun 2014, at 21:39, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > I care about the notion behind. Call it the "ONE" Let's call it the "BULLSHIT". Why not. But it can be confusing. > read Plotinus, Given that your average 6th grader knows far more abo

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

at's not even rational >> >> >> If you read it as "In every possible world g is false and g=Some God", >> it's irrational (unless g entails a contradiction). But that isn't >> atheism. An atheist says "g doesn't exist" and that&

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> On 28 Jun 2014, at 5:39 am, John Clark wrote: > > Given that your average 6th grader knows far more about the universe than he > ever did why in hell should I read Plotinus?? Yes, kids have the ability to understand a lot more than we give them credit for, don't they? I walked into a class

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> On 28 Jun 2014, John Clark wrote: > > Most intelligent educated people long ago abandoned the notion of God, That's truly funny. You really did go to bed and dreamt that one. Now you are outdoing me in insulting Americans by calling most of the human race, including the majority of people i

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 28 June 2014 07:25, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:06 PM, LizR wrote: > > > Surely Atheist means 100% sure, so 99.9% is still agnostic >> > > The existence or nonexistence of God is just one fact about the world, > there are lots more, s

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > I care about the notion behind. Call it the "ONE" > Let's call it the "BULLSHIT". > read Plotinus, > Given that your average 6th grader knows far more about the universe than he ever did why in hell should I read Plotinus?? > I made cle

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:06 PM, LizR wrote: > Surely Atheist means 100% sure, so 99.9% is still agnostic > The existence or nonexistence of God is just one fact about the world, there are lots more, so I guess we need to invent hairsplitting distinctions for them all. We n

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

nconceivable freedom". The Greek socials, or the Nordish brutes? I missed Bruno's definition of atheist and agnostic and my own is poorly formulated. I THINK (my) atheist (I) is not to include a human-like person as a factor for the 'creation' etc., with human

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 26 Jun 2014, at 20:51, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Concerning the existence of a china teapot in orbit around the planet Uranus, are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? > Agnostic. Is the possibility of such a orbiting tea

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

ring thesis. The genuine corresponding "blaspheme" with comp, will consist in confusing the machines's soul ([]p & p) with the machine's body ([]p, []p & <>t) or 3p description (and 1p-plural). I see the thread is long, I might answer some posts soon or later

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

t;In every possible world g is false and g=Some God", it's irrational (unless g entails a contradiction). But that isn't atheism. An atheist says "g doesn't exist" and that's prefectly rational if g=Yaweh or g=Zeus or g=Baal or... Which is why

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

(unless g entails a contradiction). But that isn't > atheism. An atheist says "g doesn't exist" and that's prefectly rational > if g=Yaweh or g=Zeus or g=Baal or... Which is why I said it depends on g. > If g is "some mystic unifying principle" then I&#x

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

Russell Standish > To: everything-list > Sent: Thu, Jun 26, 2014 8:46 pm > Subject: Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, > non-digital, computer architecture > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:05:55PM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrot

RE: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 8:34 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 6/26/2014 4:19 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: But []~g in contrast... that's not even rational If you read it as "In every possible world g is false and g=Some God", it's irrational (unless g entails a contradiction). But that isn't atheism. An atheist sa

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

. -Original Message- From: Russell Standish To: everything-list Sent: Thu, Jun 26, 2014 8:46 pm Subject: Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:05:55PM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

y > hello to God, Mr. Clark. Or to quote, Richard Dawkins, "Yes, I can imagine > there are god-like intelligences in the universe." Atheist, Agnostic, > Believer? Sure. All three. > Technically, those are demigods, of course. --

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 09:51:51AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 25 Jun 2014, at 17:55, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: > > >Dr. Marchal, do you ever get in conversations with your fellow > >academician, Clement Vidal? He's a philosopher at your University? > >Do you ever get into the

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

are atheists, but >> this can only create a confusion. >> > > Concerning the existence of a china teapot in orbit around the planet > Uranus, are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? > > > Agnostic. You never know. I agree that with such a teapot, and what I > b

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 27 June 2014 06:51, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> Concerning the existence of a china teapot in orbit around the planet >>> Uranus, are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? >>> >> >> > Agnost

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

Nordish brutes? I missed Bruno's definition of atheist and agnostic and my own is poorly formulated. I THINK (my) *atheist* (I) is *not to include* a human-like person as a factor for the 'creation' etc., *with *human attributes and deficiencies, rather leaving it to *Nature(?*) to evol

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

a confusion. Concerning the existence of a china teapot in orbit around the planet Uranus, are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? Agnostic. You never know. I agree that with such a teapot, and what I believe, I would say that it highly non plausible. Yet your analogy does not work, because the notion o

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Concerning the existence of a china teapot in orbit around the planet >> Uranus, are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? >> > > > Agnostic. > Is the possibility of such a orbiting teapot large enough that i

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? Agnostic. You never know. I agree that with such a teapot, and what I believe, I would say that it highly non plausible. Yet your analogy does not work, because the notion of god is not that clear-cut. Bruno Technically I guess I'd have to s

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

ssage- From: LizR To: everything-list Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 6:43 pm Subject: Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture On 26 June 2014 07:05, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: > Or to quote, Richard Dawkins, "Yes,

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

view. You might say more on this perhaps. Bruno -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal To: everything-list Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 10:36 am Subject: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non- boolean, non-digital, computer architecture On 27 May 2014, at 01:37, P

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 26 June 2014 16:10, meekerdb wrote: > That isn't the reason I gave. I pointed out that for the consciousness of > the MGA to be achieved it had to consciousness of a world and that world > had to have a physics and the consciousness then depended on events and > processes in that physics. So

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 6/25/2014 8:51 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:44, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 6/25/2014 8:38 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:25, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 09:08, meeker

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 26 June 2014 14:49, Kim Jones wrote: > "Computationalists don't die - they just go to Moscow or Washington." > Teehee. You're a lot better at this than I am. Maybe I should stick to crossword clues. "Supporter of early cheer may end impossible beliefs (9,5)" -- You received this message be

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 26 June 2014 15:44, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/25/2014 8:38 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 26 June 2014 15:25, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >>> >>> Now I know Bruno will say thi

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 6/25/2014 8:38 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:25, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: Now I know Bruno

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 26 June 2014 15:25, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> Now I know Bruno will say this is just choosing the wrong level, but >>> the point is that it's not just the level which

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:08 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > >> Now I know Bruno will say this is just choosing the wrong level, but the >> point is that it's not just the level which is sufficient for interaction >> with neurons, but also the level which capt

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: Now I know Bruno will say this is just choosing the wrong level, but the point is that it's not just the level which is sufficie

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> On 26 Jun 2014, at 12:17 pm, LizR wrote: > > Or maybe "This space reserved for a Theory of Everything" > "Computationalists don't die - they just go to Moscow or Washington." K -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To uns

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

Or maybe "This space reserved for a Theory of Everything" -- 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 pos

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 26 June 2014 14:13, Kim Jones wrote: > Hey! Let's have a T-shirt slogan competition! > > I'll kick off with: > > "I used to be an Atheist but now I'm a Neoplatonist Digital Mechanist > Neutral Monist. What are you?" > > I want that T-shirt! Ho

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> >> On 26 Jun 2014, at 11:59 am, LizR wrote: >> >>> On 26 June 2014 13:56, Kim Jones wrote: >>> >>> When Richard Dawkins briefly had me convinced that I was atheist I ordered >>> from his foundation one of those lovely black T-shirt

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 3:31 AM, LizR wrote: > I think the term has broadened out since it was first introduced. Nowadays > it appears to mean believing there are no supernatural forces of any kind. > It also seems to (often implicitly) mean believing that the "primitive > materialist" view of th

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

od, but I'm afraid of him." Well >> > I believe in God, and the only thing that scares me is Keyser Soze". >> >> When Richard Dawkins briefly had me convinced that I was atheist I ordered >> from his foundation one of those lovely black T-shirts with the

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

elieve in God, and the only thing that scares me is Keyser Soze". > > When Richard Dawkins briefly had me convinced that I was atheist I ordered > from his foundation one of those lovely black T-shirts with the red letter > 'A' on the front which I proudly wore whenever

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

> On 26 Jun 2014, at 5:05 am, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: > > "Keaton always said, "I don't believe in God, but I'm afraid of him." Well I > believe in God, and the only thing that scares me is Keyser Soze". When Richard Dawkins

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL Email: kimjo...@ozemail.com.au kmjco...@icloud.com Mobile: 0450 963 719 Phone: 02 93894239 Web: http://www.eportfolio.kmjcommp.com "Never let your schooling get in the way of your education" - Mark Twain > On 26 Jun 2014, at 5:05 am, spudboy100 vi

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > Now I know Bruno will say this is just choosing the wrong level, but the >> point is that it's not just the level which is sufficient for interaction >> with neurons, but also the level which captures interac

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 26 June 2014 05:29, meekerdb wrote: > So in effect the non-cloning theorem prevents saying "yes" to the doctor > if you insist on there being no discontinuity in your consciousness. The > Moscow man and the Washington man will be in different quantum states even > before they step out of the

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

I think the term has broadened out since it was first introduced. Nowadays it appears to mean believing there are no supernatural forces of any kind. It also seems to (often implicitly) mean believing that the "primitive materialist" view of the physical world is correct, too. -- You received thi

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

and judges humans in an afterlife. Or is it the god of deism who > created the world but doesn't act in it. Or is it one of the "gods" of > mystics who is a principle or "nature" or an unnameable and unknowable > something. Literally "atheist" is

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On 26 June 2014 07:05, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Or to quote, Richard Dawkins, "Yes, I can imagine there are god-like intelligences in the universe." Atheist, Agnostic, Believer? Sure. All three. (Or in other universes, or bran

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: Now I know Bruno will say this is just choosing the wrong level, but the point is that it's not just the level which is sufficient for interaction with neurons, but also the level which captures interaction with 'external' or 'environmenta

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

test and oldest mind. In fact this mind, developed the universe into a place that is occasionally fit for types of life, one of them carbon-water life. Say hello to God, Mr. Clark. Or to quote, Richard Dawkins, "Yes, I can imagine there are god-like intelligences in the universe."

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/19/2013 1:03 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:36 PM, John Mikes wrote: > >> Here is my tuppence about the *hoax-game* of the *fantasy-play* >> 'teleportation': >> It is what I said, never substantiated and placed

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 12/19/2013 1:03 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:36 PM, John Mikes > wrote: Here is my tuppence about the *hoax-game* of the *fantasy-play* 'teleportation': It is what I said, never substantiated and placed into circumstances never sub

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

t act in it. Or is it one of the "gods" of mystics who is a principle or "nature" or an unnameable and unknowable something. Literally "atheist" is one who is not a theist, one who fails to believe in the god of theism. Thomas Jefferson was called an atheist be

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > In Brussels, the atheists claims that agnostics are atheists, but this > can only create a confusion. > Concerning the existence of a china teapot in orbit around the planet Uranus, are you a teapot atheist or agnostic? Tech

Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

on is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture On 27 May 2014, at 01:37, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:53 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: From: everything-list@g

Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

r 3 minutes on his take regarding "atheism and agnosticism": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos Very nice. I am not astonished that Tyson is systematically renamed "atheist" on the wiki page on him (that he did not create, but try to correct, unsuccessful

Re: God is an atheist!

In much the same spirit take a look at this cartoon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODetOE6cbbc&list=PLECD9ACF9D6F1F8FF John K Clark = On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:51 PM, LizR wrote: > Why does this sort of thing never work for me? It's almost like a higher > power is determined to st

Re: God is an atheist!

ent value in that. >> > > Even so, Uberthulhu has the same problem that we do. > Poor Uberthulhu :) > The explanatory gap is not explained, only miniaturized and hidden behind > the alien-ness of disembodied dovetailing. > But maybe what you call the "explanatory gap&qu

Re: God is an atheist!

...or if that's God, barking in the quad. -- 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,

Re: God is an atheist!

On 5/8/2014 2:51 PM, LizR wrote: Why does this sort of thing never work for me? It's almost like a higher power is determined to stop me. OK, let's try again... (​Or does God lie awake at nights wondering where HE came from?) Q: What's a dyslexic agnostic insomniac? A: Someone who lies awa

Re: God is an atheist!

Why does this sort of thing never work for me? It's almost like a higher power is determined to stop me. OK, let's try again... (​Or does God lie awake at nights wondering where HE came from?) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group

Re: God is an atheist!

t; >> >>> >>> Telmo. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List < >>>> everyth...@googlegroups.com>: >>>> >>&

Re: God is an atheist!

>>>> heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another >>>> thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the >>>> Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the >>>> 3rd&#x

Re: God is an atheist!

;>> interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate >>> biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out >>> (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to >>> what Aquinas thought about G

Re: God is an atheist!

; thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using the Schrodinger >> universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the 3rd's >> interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate >> biology inside of, a thankless t

Re: God is an atheist!

ically to > what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic > or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. > > > -Original Message- > From: LizR > To: everything-list > Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am > Subject: God is an a

Re: God is an atheist!

3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your graphic or wh

Re: God is an atheist!

> On 8 May 2014, at 3:09 pm, LizR wrote: > > As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... Apparently not. Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop recei

God is an atheist!

​ As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the picture... -- 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...@g

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 16:12, Stephen Paul King wrote: I think that you are reading too much into what I wrote. Interleaving. On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 17:07, Stephen Paul King wrote: I agree with what you wrote to Richard. If we then con

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 1/2/2014 12:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Jan 2014, at 21:38, meekerdb wrote: On 1/1/2014 4:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Jan 2014, at 01:18, meekerdb wrote: On 12/31/2013 1:58 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 10:46, meekerdb > wrote: On 31 De

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Richard, > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 01 Jan 2014, at 21:38, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 1/1/2014 4:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> snip > > >> I disagree with this. Everett did propose a

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

Richard, On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Jan 2014, at 21:38, meekerdb wrote: On 1/1/2014 4:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: snip I disagree with this. Everett did propose a new theory. It is SWE, that is QM without collapse. *All* interpretations of it ar

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 01 Jan 2014, at 21:38, meekerdb wrote: > > On 1/1/2014 4:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 01 Jan 2014, at 01:18, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/31/2013 1:58 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 1 January 2014 10:46, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 31 Dec

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 01 Jan 2014, at 21:38, meekerdb wrote: On 1/1/2014 4:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Jan 2014, at 01:18, meekerdb wrote: On 12/31/2013 1:58 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 10:46, meekerdb wrote: On 31 Dec 2013, at 03:09, LizR wrote: But I feel that you must already know this. Are

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >