> On 21 Apr 2018, at 19:30, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 6:31 AM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com 
> <mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com>> wrote:
> 
> > Religions play a multitude of roles. For example to relieve suffering
> With the exception of death itself religion has caused more misery in the 
> world than anything in human history.
> 
> 

Only the institiuonalization of religion. Ad to be sure, that is not clear, as 
science has still progressed by reaction to this, so I doubt we can really be 
sure.




> >  and provide meaning.
> Religion tells us that the meaning of our existence is to flatter God, it 
> does not say what the meaning of God's existence is.
> 
Flattering god was a mean for humans to forces the flattering on themselves. 
Jews and many other religion or spiritual quest warns against that type of 
“blasphemy”, and indeed we see what happens when that is done. But that is no 
more religion than the prohibition of medication is health. Bad people with 
special interest exists, and they use watahever they can like “science” (cg 
genetics in USSR, or the whole science before Renaissance.





>  
> 
> > Science can help relieve many types of suffering, but it cannot relieve 
> > existential angst
> Sure it can, you just need the right chemicals.  
> 
> 

Few chemicals could do that, except salvia perhaps, but that is not clear. 
Magic shrooms helps, but don’t give communicable answers. You continue to talk 
like Aristotelians.




> > I like to define God, sometimes, by what you still believe in when you 
> > understand that the physical reality is a persistent illusion. quots
> I don’t know if you said that or Bruno or somebody else, the endless sea of 
> quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes seen on this list has stumped me, but 
> only somebody who has abandoned the idea of God but not the English word 
> “God” would like that definition. I like Mark Twain’s definition of faith:
> 
> 

Counter-example: you. You have attack me as much during the period I call it 
“the One”, or “Tao” than God. God is better because it is substantive, and it 
is used as a nickname for the “one which has no name”, and which is not so far 
away to Plotinus “the Number of the numbers”, or Cantor “collection of all sets 
(which cannot be a set). 

God cannot be studied through a name or a description, but many concept get 
close, like “infinity”. Cantor set theory has been criticised by many 
mathematicians as being “theology”, but Cantor took that as a compliment and a 
deep truth.



> “Faith is believing what you know ain't so.”
> 
> 


That is blind faith, which is the opposite of faith by reason, as we (the 
universal numbers) can understand that there must be some reality transcending 
us.


Bruno




> John K Clark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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 
> <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to