John, I agree with Craig. The concept of divine simplicity exists in several religions ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_simplicity ). The concept is also not dissimilar to the "Neti Neti" (Not this, not that) explanation of Brahman in Hindusim ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neti_neti ) or the Nirguna Brahman, which is Brahman without qualities.
Of course, the whole question of what is simple and what is complex requires a definition of complexity. The universal dovetailer is a simple program, yet it generates all programs. The Mandlebrot set has a simple definition, but is infinitely detailed. Pi has a simple definition, but an infinite expansion of digits. So apparent complexity, of a universe, a world, etc. need not be dependent on complex underlying principles or systems. Bruno often says, arithmetic is much bigger when seen from the inside. Jason On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > A two year old can understand what God is supposed to be. >> > > A two year old can't understand how something simple can know everything > and neither can I; and there is a reason the word "simple" is often used as > a synonym for "stupid". And the Bible just says that God made animals but > it doesn't say how, but Darwin didn't just say Evolution made animals he > explained how it did it. Saying "animals exist because of God" is no more > helpful than saying "animals exist because of flobkneegrab". > > > The position that I am arguing is knock down that unsupported balloon >> that you tried to float about science being better than religion because >> science always means that complex things are explained by simple things. >> > > That is not what science means that is what a explanation means; a theory > (like the God theory) that explains the existence of something unlikely > (like us) by postulating the existence of something even more unlikely > (like God) is worse than useless. > > > > Your straw man of me arguing that God is not important didn't work. >> > > Good, now I don't have to find a verse in the Bible proving that it > teaches that God is grand. > > > > This is something that science and religion have in common, not which >> sets them apart. >> > > But you aren't exactly a expert on science, you admitted that to you most > scientific papers are just a huge amount of mumbo jumbo, so your readers > might be wise to take your views on the value of science with a grain of > salt. > > John K Clark > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
