On 26 Dec 2016, at 18:08, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 12/26/2016 4:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I have made it clear in posts and papers that the God of the
machine is Arithmetical Truth...
..
And speaking of a sack full of doorknobs, how can one tell the
difference between a serious theologian and a buffoon theologian?
The first one personified God metaphorically.
Then it's a ridiculously misleading metaphor.
It makes sense in arithmetic, because the set of true sentences is
close for the modus ponens rule, and can be seen as a set of beliefs,
so God is personified by saying that she is the knower or the believer
in the true arithmetical sentences.
Persons exist in space and time and interact with other persons.
No. This is true in Aristotle theology, but it has been shown
logically incompatible with computationalism which requires platonist
theology.
They have values and emotions and act on them. The "truths of
arithmetic" are not in spacetime,
OK.
don't change
OK.
or act,
deends how you define "act". Arithmetical truth can act in the
absolute sense of being the roots of all acts and facts, and in the
relative sense as defining the conditions which makes to some person
to be acting relatively to universal numbers.
have no emotions, values, or goals.
We don't know that.
So to personify them is a dishonest move.
Not in the context of a theory, where it is natural, as I explained
before. The person "god"
An attempt to appropriate all the religious feelings of those raised
as Christians, Muslims, Hindus, etc.
They are the one having started with Platon theology, and then
(unfortunately) Aristotle theology.
But yes, yhe general idea is that all religious feeling comes from the
same unique "One" and that that the discrepancies comes from human
literalness and contingent histories. In fact, like Alsoud Huxley
emphasized, the "true" theology is suspected to be at the intersection
of all theologies, and that is the case for the theology of the
universal numbers.
The second one take such personification literally.
The first one use reason, and verification. he changes the theory
when it does not conform to facts.
Yes, he changes the theory to a completely different theory - but he
insists on using the the same "metaphor". That should make it clear
he is using the "metaphor" to mislead.
Then Earth is also a metaphor, and disallowing it would have made
progress impossible.
What you say is just that Aristotle theology is the only theology
possible, and you make happy all those who want religion kept in the
hands of the manipulators. This is the roman catholic move. You make
the pope happy, not to talk of the many obscurantists in that domain.
Bruno
Brent
“People are more unwilling to give up the word ‘God’ than to
give up the idea for which the word has hitherto stood”
--- Bertrand Russell
--
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@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
