Re: MD MOQ and The Problem Of Evil

From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Fri Aug 20 2004 - 05:53:16 BST

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MD Plotinus, Pirsig and Wilber"

    He Mel, and all,

    On 19 Aug 2004 at 20:17, ml wrote:

    The fundamentally significant portion of religiousness is
    spiritual, not intellectual or social. To use intellectual tools in
    dealing with the spiritual is equivalent to using social only
    reasoning to evaluate the significance of the intellectual level.

    msh says:
    And this would be fine, except that religious people seem to want the
    weight of reason behind their beliefs. If they would simply say "My
    beliefs are not rational, so fuck off," there would be no room for
    argument. But even the Zendy/religious guys in this group, yourself,
    Paul Turner, Dan Glover, Ant, Scott, maybe Chris Phoenix, David
    Morey, consistently voice their opinions in a logical, rational, if-
    then, argumentative, REASONABLE way. As far as I can tell, Joe
    Maurer is the only guy who approaches the issue in a totally mystical
    way.

    The point is, you can't have it both ways. If you value rationality
    then you must answer rational challenges rationally. If you do not
    value rationality then the notion of rational conversation is self-
    contradictory.

    mel:
    Despite the strength that logic offers our mental toolbox,
    one problem we have using logic, especially deductive
    reasoning, is that like a computer GIGO rules. Logic is
    not capable of discerning the significance of what is to
    be argued, it can only evaluate the truth.

    msh:
    Agreed. This is why evidence is as important as logic. What's the
    problem?

    mel:
    So, using logic to make my point.
    Assume that god does NOT exist.
    The set of extant god is empty. or
    The existence of god is is an empty set.
    Since all things are true of the empty set.
    I can assert:
    God Exists
    >>BANG<<
    I just created god...

    msh says:
    This goes nowhere. If nothing untrue can be said of the empty set,
    then anything, in it or not, doesn't exist.

    mel:
    Point is, a logical argument re: POE
    is as inappropriate - in my infallible opinion
    (being Pope of the church of 6 PM BEER ;-)

    msh:
    No. The point is a simple question: Are your beliefs rational, or
    not?

    me:
    Apologies if I offended anyone personally.
    It was not my intent.

    msh:
    No need to apologize to me, at least: skin too thick, brain too
    dull, to be offended. :-)

    Best to all,
    Mark Steven Heyman (msh)

    -- 
    InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
    Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
    Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
    "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is 
    everything."  -- Henri Poincare'
    MOQ.ORG  - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward  - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 20 2004 - 06:36:47 BST