On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 6:45 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
You are the one making systematically a confusion between the 1-view
and the 3-view.
For several years now Bruno Marchal has accused John Clark
much. i do the
same with my students in math. Why some people avoid reason in some circumstance. Given
that Quentin seems to qualify himself as atheist, it can't be simply Clark's atheism,
isn't it? But then what?
I think the sticking point, one which I also feel with some force, is the implicit
On 12/9/2013 1:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Dec 2013, at 05:52, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/8/2013 1:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
No, it's a simple matter of using different words for different things and not
muddling the distinction. The Abrahamic religions make a positive virtue of faith:
Hi John,
I am not sure I understand. You ask me the question I was implicitly asking
to John C., it seems to me. I am not proving the non existence of something
(comp-I), but its existence (in the comp theory).
Bruno
*My apologies! I am frequently perplexed by the position-lined discussion
On 07 Dec 2013, at 19:40, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/7/2013 12:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
It looks like some atheists are condescending with the people. They
act like thinking that the people are so stupid that they should be
allowed to believe in Santa Klaus. But that attitude keep such
to a religion.
Brent
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to
believe things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus
deprived himself of a convenient means of feeling superior to
others.
Again, that is agnosticism, not atheism.
It's a quip, not a serious definition
On 07 Dec 2013, at 20:09, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/7/2013 1:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But we know already that the universe, whatever it is, cannot
entirely understand itself, notably because no machine can ever
completely understand itself.
That depends on it being digital and infinite.
On 07 Dec 2013, at 19:59, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/7/2013 12:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:55, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13,
Bill: silence.
I have never met them, and people reports that their only argument is
shoulder shrugging. No word at all. Just two lines of an atheist
philosopher personal conviction. More grave defamation has been
reported too, and some makes me think there are also personal issues
@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, Dec 7, 2013 3:51 pm
Subject: Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 07 Dec 2013, at 17:37, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Comp-I = Comp-Immortality.
I know what a bull is and I know what shit is so I know what
bullshit
Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color; like OFF is a
television channel.
Again that is agnosticism. (I suspect that you are not an atheist in
the european sense of the word. Those really believe in Matter, and
that there are no Gods, which is contradictory with the original greek
refer to when they say they belong
to a religion.
Brent
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to believe
things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of
a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
Again, that is agnosticism, not atheism
cinclusions.
I take 'religion' to mean what people refer to when they say they
belong to a religion.
Brent
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to
believe things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus
deprived himself of a convenient means of feeling superior
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 7:44 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/7/2013 12:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Comp is the belief (hope, assumption, theory) that you can survive when
saying yes to a doctor who proposed to you a digital computer brain
transplant.
If that were all comp meant I would have no problem with it, but I
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 5:24 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Comp is the belief (hope, assumption, theory) that you can survive when
saying yes to a doctor who proposed to you a digital computer brain
As I've shown numerous times now, what you assert below is plain lies.
While I can agree sometimes with things you say, I cannot let such obvious
lies pass through. Quentin
Le 8 déc. 2013 17:24, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com a écrit :
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Bruno Marchal
Telmo Menezes
you must also reject the MWI, because you live
Who is you? Telmo's post was only 63 words long but the pronoun you was
used 8 times, that's almost 13%. When it is necessary to hide behind
personal pronouns when a philosophical idea regarding duplicating machines
and personal
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
what you assert below is plain lies. While I can agree sometimes with
things you say, I cannot let such obvious lies pass through.
But you've just let such obvious lies pass through. You haven't
specifically challenged
2013/12/8 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
what you assert below is plain lies. While I can agree sometimes with
things you say, I cannot let such obvious lies pass through.
But you've just let such obvious lies pass
Bruno wrote Dec.06 to John Clark:
*What about comp-immortality? have you an argument which makes you sure
that your consciousness is not related to your computations in arithmetic?
That would be a case you seem to know better than us*.
Excuse mewhat kind of 'argument' do you require to
On 08 Dec 2013, at 17:24, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
Comp is the belief (hope, assumption, theory) that you can survive
when saying yes to a doctor who proposed to you a digital computer
brain transplant.
If that were
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 6:59 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
Telmo Menezes
you must also reject the MWI, because you live
Who is you? Telmo's post was only 63 words long but the pronoun you was
used 8 times, that's almost 13%. When it is necessary to hide behind
personal
On 12/8/2013 1:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
No, it's a simple matter of using different words for different things and not muddling
the distinction. The Abrahamic religions make a positive virtue of faith:
Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of
his Reason.
---
On 12/6/2013 11:47 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
What is subjective is the appreciation, or not, of the term theology, and that is
subjective indeed, but it could also be related to strategy. My difference with
Quentin is on that point. But I have already hidden the wording theology for a long
On 06 Dec 2013, at 18:21, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/6 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com
On 06 Dec 2013, at 18:22, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/6 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com
Jason, please see: http://can-you-answer.com/
particularly: http://can-you-answer.com/CanBahaisAnswer/canBaAns.htm
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/6 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A religion is based on dogma,
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:50, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
Can you refute comp-I?
No I can not because of the IHA principle.
Comp-I = Comp-Immortality.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:55, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
I repeat the cult of men to men is the most primitive and
they
belong to a religion.
Brent
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to believe
things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus deprived
himself of a convenient means of feeling superior to others.
Again, that is agnosticism, not atheism.
Bruno
--- Chaz Bufe
On 06 Dec 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 10:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
There is no science. There are only field of inquiries, and
humans having a scientific attitude. Scientific attitude is field
independent. Research can be refrained only by abuse of authority.
Genuine
On 06 Dec 2013, at 21:31, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI but there seem to be
plenty on this list.
I neither believe nor disbelieve in quantum immortality, I am not
ashamed to
On 06 Dec 2013, at 23:04, Quentin Anciaux wrote (to PGC)
So your world discovery quoted above is already too dogmatic; even
to a Wiki-Taoist.
Are you saying we can't ? Yes, one hypothesis of science, is that
the world is understandable... if it is not, all of what you're
saying is
On 07 Dec 2013, at 09:06, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 11:47 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
What is subjective is the appreciation, or not, of the term
theology, and that is subjective indeed, but it could also be
related to strategy. My difference with Quentin is on that point.
But I have
2013/12/6 Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
Science comes from latin and means knowledge... if some wants to use
science as a cover for something else, that doesn't redefine what it is...
science is an attitude towards pursuit of knowledge...
Thank you. The victims of sectarianism in the
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Comp-I = Comp-Immortality.
I know what a bull is and I know what shit is so I know what bullshit is. I
know what immortality is but I don't know what comp is so I don't know what
comp-Immortality is.
John K Clark
--
You received
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
What about comp-immortality?
That's what I'd like to know, what the hell is comp-immortality? How does
it differ from regular run of the mill immortality? Your homemade words
acronyms and phrases are getting out of hand.
have you an
On 12/7/2013 12:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
It looks like some atheists are condescending with the people. They act like thinking
that the people are so stupid that they should be allowed to believe in Santa Klaus. But
that attitude keep such beliefs strongly in the hand of the authoritative
On 12/7/2013 12:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38
On 12/7/2013 12:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2013, at 19:55, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
I repeat the cult of
then it must always have been right.
That is just my take according to my own definitions. You may define religion as dogma
and come to different cinclusions.
I take 'religion' to mean what people refer to when they say they belong to a
religion.
Brent
Atheist n A person to be pitied
On 12/7/2013 1:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But we know already that the universe, whatever it is, cannot entirely understand
itself, notably because no machine can ever completely understand itself.
That depends on it being digital and infinite.
Brent
--
You received this message because
On 12/7/2013 1:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Dec 2013, at 09:06, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/6/2013 11:47 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
What is subjective is the appreciation, or not, of the term theology, and that is
subjective indeed, but it could also be related to strategy. My difference with
On 07 Dec 2013, at 17:37, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Comp-I = Comp-Immortality.
I know what a bull is and I know what shit is so I know what
bullshit is. I know what immortality is but I don't know what comp
is so I don't know what
man be an atheist ?
On 07 Dec 2013, at 17:37, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Comp-I = Comp-Immortality.
I know what a bull is and I know what shit is so I know what bullshit is. I
know what immortality is but I don't know what comp is so
On 07 Dec 2013, at 17:58, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
What about comp-immortality?
That's what I'd like to know, what the hell is comp-immortality?
How does it differ from regular run of the mill immortality? Your
homemade words acronyms
On 05 Dec 2013, at 18:30, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
I repeat my question, why add useless wheels within wheels that
explain nothing to otherwise nice theories?
To take into account the discovery already made by
On 05 Dec 2013, at 18:35, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Alberto G. Corona
agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
you can not live without a form of religion
Speak for yourself, I've been living without religion since i was 12.
Without fairy tales. Nice for you. But religion
On 05 Dec 2013, at 18:36, Richard Ruquist wrote:
I believe in science.
That is my religion.
Yes. Religion is no more than the idea that science put some light on
*something* beyond ourself.
As Einstein said : religion without science is blind, science without
religion is lame.
Bruno
On 05 Dec 2013, at 18:38, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
A religion is based on dogma,
That is your dogma. Religion is based on experience and dialog for the
founder of science and modern theology, which is forbidden since
about 1500 years.
Bruno
science is not, hence science is not a
withouth myths. If he
reject the given ones, he invent its own.
2013/12/1 LizR lizj...@gmail.com
Because there are no obvious signs of government in the universe, I
would say.
On 2 December 2013 10:29, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
How can a grown man be an atheist ?
An atheist
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
religion.
Some religions may be, that
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:15, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
religion.
Some religions may be, that
2013/12/6 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:13, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
I repeat the cult of men to men is the most primitive and
dangerous religion. And RELIGION CAN NOT BE AVOIDED: you can not
live without a form of
the peculiar authoritative use made by the institutions?
Because if atheist had done what you advocate, church would still burn them
in 2013...
Bruno
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:36, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/5/2013 12:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Dec 2013, at 19:29, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrot
I have already insist that God cannot be part of the
explanation. We agree on
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:45, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Who can tell me that quantum immortality is not religion.
Well, it is a consequence of QM without collapse, or more simply,
elementary arithmetic (and comp). But you need faith to believe in
them and their meaning/models.
BTW it is
On 05 Dec 2013, at 20:23, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It isn't... QI is not worshipped, it is not a belief per se (you can
entertain the idea for an argument or a theory that's all) and QI
could in principle be proven false... A religion by being based on
faith cannot.
It is true that there
On 05 Dec 2013, at 21:56, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI
but there seem to be plenty on this list.
Can you refute comp-I?
I can't, even without the step 8.
Bruno
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:51 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5,
Message-
From: Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 2:23 pm
Subject: Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
It isn't... QI is not worshipped, it is not a belief per se (you can
entertain the idea for an argument
On 05 Dec 2013, at 23:47, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 03 Dec 2013, at 01:42, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
Good question, and one which is repeatedly
The dogma that science (in the very narrow sense used today for such
world) is not dogma is the foundation stone of one of the most sucessful
modern religions: scientism.
That is wonderful since there is no knowledge possible without initial
postulates or dogmas as you may call it. This erasure
Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and
questionned... On the contrary, religions *must* have some part that can't
be discussed, you can't say you're catholic if you don't believe jesus was
the son of god... you can't say you're buddhist and reject what the buddha
said.
So
2013/12/6 Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and
questionned...
So science is the art of discussing and questioning everything?
That is like saying nothing.
In the other side, one thing is the activity of science, other the
different
Science comes from latin and means knowledge... if some wants to use
science as a cover for something else, that doesn't redefine what it is...
science is an attitude towards pursuit of knowledge...
Quentin
2013/12/6 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
2013/12/6 Quentin Anciaux
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and questionned...
That is philosophy. Science is more narrow -- and it should be.
Science is empiricism. It is restricted to the domains of knowledge
where
On 05 Dec 2013, at 21:56, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI
but there seem to be plenty on this list.
Bruno: Can you refute comp-I?
I can't, even without the step 8.
Richard: I do not have to since it is a matter of belief.
I do not believe that universes
2013/12/6 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
wrote:
Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and
questionned...
That is philosophy. Science is more narrow -- and it should be.
Science is empiricism.
2013/12/6 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
wrote:
Science has no dogma, because everything can be discussed and
questionned...
That is philosophy. Science is more narrow -- and it should be.
Science is empiricism. It
2013/12/6 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
On 05 Dec 2013, at 21:56, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI
but there seem to be plenty on this list.
Bruno: Can you refute comp-I?
I can't, even without the step 8.
Richard: I do not have to since it is a
-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, Dec 6, 2013 4:07 am
Subject: Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 05 Dec 2013, at 22:33, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 spudboy...@aol.com
They are proven false. People leave religions all the time. Often for another
one
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
religion.
Some
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
religion.
Some
2013/12/6 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.comjasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A
2013/12/6 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.comjasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
A
On 06 Dec 2013, at 13:52, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Science comes from latin and means knowledge...
*that* *is* *the* error of the latine. They misunderstanding of
the greeks and indians.
For the platonist, and the popperians notably, science is *only*
beliefs, public theories,
I would
, and ... the theology of numbers.
In other words, what all the rest of the world calls philosophy.
Brent
Atheism is not a religion, just as a vacant lot is not a type of
building, and health is not a form of sickness.
--- Jim Heldberg, San Francisco Atheist Coordinator
--
You received
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Can you refute comp-I?
No I can not because of the IHA principle.
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
On 12/6/2013 12:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 19:29, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/5/2013 1:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Dec 2013, at 13:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
I repeat the cult of men to men is the most primitive and dangerous religion. And
RELIGION CAN NOT BE
On 12/6/2013 3:59 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
The dogma that science (in the very narrow sense used today for such world) is not
dogma is the foundation stone of one of the most sucessful modern religions: scientism.
That is wonderful since there is no knowledge possible without initial
On 12/6/2013 4:46 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
So science is the art of discussing and questioning everything?
Plus hypothesizing and testing.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
On 12/6/2013 4:56 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Science cannot get rid of fundamental ontological and epistemological
assumptions.
What are these? Is Bruno getting rid of them?
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To
On 12/6/2013 7:21 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
mailto:allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
right.
That is just my take according to my own definitions. You may define religion as dogma
and come to different cinclusions.
I take 'religion' to mean what people refer to when they say they belong to a
religion.
Brent
Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to believe
On 12/6/2013 10:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
There is no science. There are only field of inquiries, and humans having a scientific
attitude. Scientific attitude is field independent. Research can be refrained only by
abuse of authority. Genuine believer hides nothing and don't fear reason.
On 06 Dec 2013, at 13:59, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On 05 Dec 2013, at 21:56, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI
but there seem to be plenty on this list.
Bruno: Can you refute comp-I?
In which theory?
In comp, comp_i is a theorem, or meta-theorem. The amoeba
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI but there seem to be plenty
on this list.
I neither believe nor disbelieve in quantum immortality, I am not ashamed
to admit that there are some things I just don't know. And
On 7 December 2013 09:31, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Well John not you nor I are believers in QI but there seem to be plenty
on this list.
I neither believe nor disbelieve in quantum immortality, I am not
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
A religion is based on dogma, science is not, hence science is not a
religion.
Some
On 6 December 2013 06:58, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:42 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I think I love you. I've been saying this sort of thing for years, but
rarely have I managed to do it so articulately.
Awww.. thanks Liz! :)
:-)
Richard:
I learned my physics dogma at Harvard Grad School.
Before that I was a mechanical engineer.
Fine, but to 'think: what is a dogma' you learned as a li'l kid when you
had to pray at bedtime.
BTW (I never attended Harvard) did they teach you that 'physics' is a
dogma?
I try to identify
2013/12/6 Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
2013/12/5 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
A religion is based on dogma,
still don't see how an interpretation of science protects it from being
practiced or manipulated dogmatically, same as with theologies though. E.g.
with some fundamentally atheist interpretation, it can even seem more
treacherous and dishonest by using empirical data as proof of truth because
Mitch
-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, Dec 6, 2013 4:07 am
Subject: Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 05 Dec 2013, at 22:33, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/12/5 spudboy...@aol.com
On 03 Dec 2013, at 19:29, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrot
I have already insist that God cannot be part of the explanation.
We agree on this.
Then I repeat my question, why add useless wheels within wheels that
explain nothing to
On 03 Dec 2013, at 01:42, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Samiya Illias
samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote:
Good question, and one which is repeatedly asked by many within and
outside the faith. God, in His complete knowledge, knows each and
every soul and who is worthy of
...@verizon.net wrote:
How can a grown man be an atheist ?
An atheist is a person who believes that the universe can
function without some form of government.
How silly.
Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000]
See my Leibniz site at
http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough
This email
701 - 800 of 882 matches
Mail list logo
