On 11.09.2012 22:09 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/11/2012 2:40 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 09.09.2012 19:45 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/9/2012 12:27 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 23:19 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Dear Evgenii,
You are asking me
On 9/11/2012 2:40 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 09.09.2012 19:45 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/9/2012 12:27 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 23:19 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Dear Evgenii,
You are asking me to explain to you in English the way the relevant
part o
On 09.09.2012 19:45 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/9/2012 12:27 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 23:19 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Dear Evgenii,
You are asking me to explain to you in English the way the relevant
part of your brain generates the particular subject
he following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-09, 13:45:50
Subject: Re: The All
On 9/9/2012 12:27 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 23:19 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 2:12 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 19:32 Step
is that the nonphysical part is simply universal intelligence,
Platonia, the All, the Supremem monad.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/10/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:12:38 AM UTC-4, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
>
> On 08.09.2012 14:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
> > On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> >> On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
> >>> On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> >>
On 9/9/2012 12:27 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 23:19 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 2:12 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 19:32 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
I will try to explain. An idea is an "abstract image", IMHO. For
example, c
On 08.09.2012 23:19 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 2:12 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 19:32 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
I will try to explain. An idea is an "abstract image", IMHO. For
example, consider all possible objects that have some t
On 9/8/2012 2:12 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 19:32 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 11:34 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is
On 08.09.2012 19:32 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 11:34 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is a visual illusion
created presumably by the
On 9/8/2012 11:34 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is a visual illusion
created presumably by the brain. Don't you agree? Then it is
exactly a relationship
On 08.09.2012 18:10 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/8/2012 12:38 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 20:30 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
This could work provided we could separate the world into
mental and physical states. The question rem
On 9/8/2012 12:38 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 20:30 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if rea
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is a visual illusion
created presumably by the brain. Don't you agree? Then it is
exactly a relationship between mental and physical states but not
i
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 14:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have writt
On 08.09.2012 14:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind
instead of in the mirror just to b
ve to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-08, 04:25:49
Subject: Re: The All
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:53, Roger Clough wrote:
"A too much powerful God leads to inconsist
On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind instead
of in the mirror just to better describe my experience). How could
you describe thi
invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Evgenii Rudnyi
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-08, 06:51:21
Subject: Re: The All
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
> On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi
that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-07, 16:22:41
Subject: Re: The All
On 9/7/2012 2:03 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> On 07.09.2012 13:43 Stephen P. King said the following:
>> On 9/7
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind instead
of in the mirror just to better describe my experience). How could
you describe this phenomenon by means of res cogitans and re
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 22:22 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
Consider the mental image that a person suffering from anorexia has
of themselves. It is distorted and false. How does this happen?
Consider the Placebo effect and its complement
t;
- Receiving the following content -
From: meekerdb
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-06, 15:03:44
Subject: Re: The All
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What i
On 07.09.2012 22:22 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
Consider the mental image that a person suffering from anorexia has
of themselves. It is distorted and false. How does this happen?
Consider the Placebo effect and its complement, the Nocebo effect.
Are they not examples o
On 07.09.2012 20:30 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic?
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Bruno Marchal
>
> IMHO computers cannot think, although they can appear to think.
> If they could think, they should be able to
>
>
>
> b) construct a language that only another computer can understand.
>
>
>
In a sense, this is what happe
On 9/7/2012 2:03 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 13:43 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/7/2012 4:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if
reality is sometimes inconsistent?
This
On 07.09.2012 13:43 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/7/2012 4:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of
content -
From: meekerdb
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-06, 15:03:44
Subject: Re: The All
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if reality is
somet
On 9/7/2012 4:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if
reality is sometimes inconsistent?
This
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if
reality is sometimes inconsistent?
This is a confusion of levels. Logic is rules ab
On 06 Sep 2012, at 21:03, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if
reality is sometimes inconsistent?
This is a confusion of levels. Logic is rules about
On 9/5/2012 12:14 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Roger,
On 05 Sep 2012, at 17:23, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
No, the supreme Monad can see everything even
though the monads have no windows.
Also the "closeness to God" issue depends
on your clarity of vision and feeling. And perhaps appe
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if reality is sometimes
inconsistent?
This is a confusion of levels. Logic is rules about truth preservation in declarative
senten
>
>
> A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
>
>
>
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic? What if reality is
sometimes inconsistent?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email
e to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-05, 09:25:11
Subject: Re: The All
On 04 Sep 2012, at 16:42, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
According to Leibniz there is only one
ibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-09-05, 09:25:11
Subject: Re: The All
On 04 Sep 2012, at 16:42, Rog
On 04 Sep 2012, at 16:42, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
According to Leibniz there is only one live perceiver, and that
he calls the Supreme Monad. Actually, not the monad itself,
but what sees through the monad.Then when we see individually
we must see through that one eye. I believe i
t;
- Receiving the following content -
From: Roger Clough
Receiver: Richard Ruquist
Time: 2012-09-05, 07:21:20
Subject: Re: Fwd: The All
Hi Richard Ruquist
I'm too busy to do your homework right now, Richard.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/5/2012
Leibniz would say, "I
Hi Bruno Marchal
According to Leibniz there is only one live perceiver, and that
he calls the Supreme Monad. Actually, not the monad itself,
but what sees through the monad.Then when we see individually
we all must be seeing through that one eye. I believe it's Plato's All,
or in my terms, Jehov
Hi Bruno Marchal
According to Leibniz there is only one live perceiver, and that
he calls the Supreme Monad. Actually, not the monad itself,
but what sees through the monad.Then when we see individually
we must see through that one eye. I believe it's Plato's All,
or in my terms, Jehovah. Indian
On 3/2/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I say is if we really want to 'shape up' and survive, then
> > compassion, democracy, ethics and scientific method are four essential
> > ingredients without which our modern world will go the way of all those
> > other civilisations your m
Mark Peaty wrote:
> No Brent, what I AM saying is that they are GONE! Well and truly
> gorrnn!
But they lasted a lot longer than we have.
>
> We could get side tracked into all sorts of discussions about how each
> of the civilisations you named, waxed and waned more than once in
No Brent, what I AM saying is that they are GONE! Well and truly
gorrnn!
We could get side tracked into all sorts of discussions about how each
of the civilisations you named, waxed and waned more than once in the
face of environmental changes and the inherent instability of feudal
Are you saying I just dreamed that Sumer, Ur, Egypt, Babylon, Rome, Sparta,
Cathay, and the Indus Valley where civilization first developed and lasted for
thousands of years (much longer than the U.S. which is the oldest existing
democracy) were not democratic and pre-dated the scientific metho
Torgny Tholerus wrote:
> Mark Peaty skrev:
>> However, we must call a spade a spade; all this guff that gets called
>> 'theology' and 'spirituality' is ultimately a bunch of assertions that
>> can neither be proved nor disproved in any concrete sense because they
>> are all expressions of belie
Well [EMAIL PROTECTED] your response has been even more disappointing
than even my very low expectation prepared me for. You have not even
recognised what my questions were about, let alone made any significant
attempt to address them.
As an ex-Christian I know what it is like to be sucked int
OK, tell me where all those civilisations of the past have gone to,
because THEY did NOT survived.
Tell me what makes YOU so sure this current global civilisation can
survive. I am more than happy to be shown where I am wrong, but if you
TRULY disagree with what I am saying, I would like you to
Dream on Brent ...
Regards
Mark Peaty CDES
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.arach.net.au/~mpeaty/
Brent Meeker wrote:
> Klortho wrote:
>
>>> The other thing I do is check to what extent a person's speech and
>>> writings support and affirm the four fundamental ingredients of
>>> civilisation:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], I rarely pass up an opportunity for religious debate,
but I am honestly overwhelmed by your recent posts. I hope you have not done
all this work just to be relegated to the list archive. How did you find us,
anyway?
Stathis Papaioannou
--~--~-~--~~~-
ote:
> > > Believing in Divine Destiny is one of the pillars of faith, and, in
> > > accordance with this belief, everything in the universe is determined
> > > by God, the All-Mighty. While there are countless absolute evidences
> > > of Destiny, it may be suffic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jesus said: "I and the Father are one" (Jn.10:30), therefore, is not
> Jesus the same, or, "co-equal" in status with his Father?
> Answer No.1
> In Greek, `heis' means `one' numerically (masc.)
> `hen' means `one' in unity or essence (neut.)
> Here the word used by John
How can we argue for God's existence and unity in a way everyone can
understand?
In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
So God sets forth parables for men in order that they may bear (them)
in mind and take lessons (through them). (14:25)
Such parables do we set forth for men so th
is 'holding forth' and purporting to describe my world for me.
>
> The other thing I do is check to what extent a person's speech and
> writings support and affirm the four fundamental ingredients of
> civilisation:
> Compassion, democracy, ethics and scientific method
On Feb 25, 2:06 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Believing in Divine Destiny is one of the pillars of faith, and, in
> > accordance with this belief, everything in the universe is determined
> > by God, the All-Mighty. While t
Klortho wrote:
>
>> The other thing I do is check to what extent a person's speech and
>> writings support and affirm the four fundamental ingredients of
>> civilisation:
>> Compassion, democracy, ethics and scientific method. No civilisation can
>> survive without all four of these.
>>
>
> Talk
> The other thing I do is check to what extent a person's speech and
> writings support and affirm the four fundamental ingredients of
> civilisation:
> Compassion, democracy, ethics and scientific method. No civilisation can
> survive without all four of these.
>
Talk about assertions without a
D] wrote:
> Believing in Divine Destiny is one of the pillars of faith, and, in
> accordance with this belief, everything in the universe is determined
> by God, the All-Mighty. While there are countless absolute evidences
> of Destiny, it may be sufficient to make some introducto
On 2/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Believing in Divine Destiny is one of the pillars of faith, and, in
> accordance with this belief, everything in the universe is determined
> by God, the All-Mighty. While there are countless absolute evidences
> of Des
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Believing in Divine Destiny is one of the pillars of faith, and, in
> accordance with this belief, everything in the universe is determined
> by God, the All-Mighty. While there are countless absolute evidences
> of Destiny, it may be sufficient
Believing in Divine Destiny is one of the pillars of faith, and, in
accordance with this belief, everything in the universe is determined
by God, the All-Mighty. While there are countless absolute evidences
of Destiny, it may be sufficient to make some introductory remarks to
demonstrate how
62 matches
Mail list logo
