tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post5330265351510056920..comments2024-03-18T17:28:44.693-07:00Comments on Rondam Ramblings: Some Christians show their true colorsRonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comBlogger88125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-88746290192705573102014-10-14T20:39:08.865-07:002014-10-14T20:39:08.865-07:00>Well, the fundamental lesson that Loki teaches...>Well, the fundamental lesson that Loki teaches is skepticism. Loki is not a benevolent god, he is the trickster. The best defense against Loki's trickery is to rely on evidence, experiment and reason as the ultimate arbiters of truth, because even Loki is subject to the laws of physics. So Loki leads me to the scientific explanation of my origin: the big bang, abiogenesis, and Darwinian Publiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00647613579979908182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-47760751221780917632014-10-14T20:25:03.643-07:002014-10-14T20:25:03.643-07:00> > Fitch's Paradox
> "... if a...> > <a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fitch-paradox/" rel="nofollow">Fitch's Paradox</a><br /><br />> "... if any truth can be known then every truth is in fact known." <i>Way more</i> logical algebra than I'll even be comfortable with. One question, though - how does <i>time</i> factor into the paradox? I.e., could it be that all truths are known only after anLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-25980917471930350662014-10-14T19:10:13.903-07:002014-10-14T19:10:13.903-07:00@Luke
>Fitch's Paradox
"... if any t...@Luke<br /><br />>Fitch's Paradox<br /><br />"... if any truth can be known then every truth is in fact known." <i>Way more</i> logical algebra than I'll even be comfortable with. One question, though - how does <i>time</i> factor into the paradox? I.e., could it be that all truths are known only after an infinite time? <br /><br />> It should not be surprising that some Publiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00647613579979908182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-12582061290628348802014-10-06T16:15:02.321-07:002014-10-06T16:15:02.321-07:00@Ron
> > I don't understand what you me...@Ron<br /><br />> > I don't understand what you mean by "chose which god to put your faith in".<br /><br />> I mean exactly that. If, as publius says, God is not accessible by evidence and requires faith, then how do I choose from among the many gods available? Should I believe in Jesus? Allah? Thor? And I'm not looking for a direct answer to that question (because yourLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-60345443870035144842014-10-06T16:12:51.777-07:002014-10-06T16:12:51.777-07:00> And if you really think that there's seri...> And if you really think that there's serious disagreement about what evidence is then we can clarify it.<br /><br />It may not be so much 'evidence' that we disagree about, so much as whether there are epistemic <i>values</i>, the truth upon which science is founded. I can quote a bit from Hilary Putnam's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Value-Dichotomy-Other-Essays/dpLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-33560747589945028082014-10-06T16:00:10.909-07:002014-10-06T16:00:10.909-07:00> Well, the fundamental lesson that Loki teache...> Well, the fundamental lesson that Loki teaches is skepticism. Loki is not a benevolent god, he is the trickster. The best defense against Loki's trickery is to rely on evidence, experiment and reason as the ultimate arbiters of truth, because even Loki is subject to the laws of physics.<br /><br />Do you have Bernard d'Espagnat's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-17754473357537381122014-10-06T15:40:46.497-07:002014-10-06T15:40:46.497-07:00> Wouldn't you expect that most of the new ...> Wouldn't you expect that most of the new covenant would be similar to the old? <br /><br />Not necessarily. I would hazard to guess that <i>the</i> top tier concern is healthy life, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom" rel="nofollow"><i>shalom</i></a>-life, life where all relationships are healthy:<br /><br /> (1) human–God<br /> (2) human–human<br /> (3) human–Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-64847966059765299712014-10-04T11:31:04.972-07:002014-10-04T11:31:04.972-07:00> A explanation of your origin
Well, the funda...> A explanation of your origin<br /><br />Well, the fundamental lesson that Loki teaches is skepticism. Loki is not a benevolent god, he is the trickster. The best defense against Loki's trickery is to rely on evidence, experiment and reason as the ultimate arbiters of truth, because even Loki is subject to the laws of physics. So Loki leads me to the scientific explanation of my originRonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-76308394921271891322014-10-04T10:46:06.602-07:002014-10-04T10:46:06.602-07:00>> Start by deciding to pick one.
>Fine....>> Start by deciding to pick one.<br /><br />>Fine. I pick Loki.<br /><br />Next, find out how Loki provides you with:<br />A explanation of your origin<br />A purpose in life<br />Acceptance and love for who you are<br />Forgiveness<br />Everlasting life<br /><br />Then, look up the normative ethics of the Loki religion. You'll want to start practicing those. If their are any Publiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00647613579979908182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-8182013532487020392014-10-04T09:14:41.419-07:002014-10-04T09:14:41.419-07:00> 78+ comments and still haven't hit Godwin...> 78+ comments and still haven't hit Godwin's law.<br /><br />I try to keep things cordial here on the Ramblings.<br /><br />> Start by deciding to pick one.<br /><br />Fine. I pick Loki.<br /><br />http://blog.rongarret.info/2010/10/myth-for-skeptics.html<br /><br />> you can't win if you don't play.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager<br /><br />Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-35951936525811822352014-10-03T23:40:16.791-07:002014-10-03T23:40:16.791-07:00@Luke
>It also avoids the question of just why...@Luke<br /><br />>It also avoids the question of just why Jesus' death on the cross magically ended the Mosaic Law. For example, we generally believe that some bits of the law still apply. Indeed, it seems that all Words of the Decalogue are still valid, albeit with the Sabbath command transformed (e.g. Rom 14:5–6). So why did some moral bits stay valid, while others poofed into Publiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00647613579979908182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-52794513416050400662014-10-03T09:58:10.854-07:002014-10-03T09:58:10.854-07:00> can we also agree that fuzziness can hide con...> can we also agree that fuzziness can hide contradictions, special pleading, etc.?<br /><br />Yes. of course. And if you really think that there's serious disagreement about what evidence is then we can clarify it. But if you're just raising this issue to be pedantic then life is too short for that.<br /><br />> The problem of other minds cannot be adjudicated solely by evidenceRonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-15373216286049424012014-10-01T12:23:06.249-07:002014-10-01T12:23:06.249-07:00> None of this casts any aspersions on the idea...> None of this casts any aspersions on the idea that evidence, experiment and reason should be the ultimate arbiters of truth.<br /><br />Let's see what happens as I continue to dig into what 'evidence' could possibly mean. I do understand that we cannot always be as precise as we'd like, but can we also agree that fuzziness can hide contradictions, special pleading, etc.?<br /Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-87375600162544004982014-10-01T12:16:10.177-07:002014-10-01T12:16:10.177-07:00> So why don't you introduce me?
He lives ...> So why don't you introduce me?<br /><br />He lives in Pasadena, and doesn't come up here too often. I go down there more often. Maybe if we meet up and get along, we could take a day trip down to LA sometime, flying out of SJC or OAK. Or, I could invite him up to SF; he doesn't teach in the Fall IIRC.<br /><br />> That is an odd thing to take delight in. Of course there are Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-14375185234488979322014-10-01T11:56:14.416-07:002014-10-01T11:56:14.416-07:00> Fourier analysis: the guy who invented it
Jo...<br />> Fourier analysis: the guy who invented it<br /><br />Joseph Fourier:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Fourier<br /><br />And a better example is quantum theory. Quantum theory started out as a complete hack. It was a desperate attempt by Planck to force-fit a mathematical function to the observed data for blackbody radiation. And it took decades before the underlying Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-49493268450307048392014-10-01T11:55:59.729-07:002014-10-01T11:55:59.729-07:00> I want you to meet the Caltech prof who was m...> I want you to meet the Caltech prof who was my best man.<br /><br />So why don't you introduce me?<br /><br />> He absolutely delights in showing people all sorts of errors in the mathematics which undergirds a lot of science.<br /><br />That is an odd thing to take delight in. Of course there are errors. So what? The claim of science is not that we have it all figured out, the Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-75414577481538714672014-10-01T10:15:54.615-07:002014-10-01T10:15:54.615-07:00> Quite rigorously as it turns out, but that...> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logic" rel="nofollow">Quite rigorously</a> as it turns out, but that's a red herring. It is not necessary to rigorously define reason in order to apply it. Read TFOR chapter 7.<br /><br />I want you to meet the Caltech prof who was my best man. He absolutely delights in showing people all sorts of errors in the mathematics which Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-60685851746856075752014-10-01T10:01:16.370-07:002014-10-01T10:01:16.370-07:00> Of course it *could* be. But it's not :-)...> Of course it *could* be. But it's not :-) The only thing that is at the foundation of science is the assumption that evidence, experiment and reason are the ultimate arbiters of truth. It is possible that teleology is out of reach, but it turns out that it's not.<br /><br />1. Why not just strike the "evidence, experiment, and reason" and say that science is <i>anything</i>Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-88144971743478419842014-10-01T09:51:41.586-07:002014-10-01T09:51:41.586-07:00> @Luke: Do you agree with publius, that it is ...> @Luke: Do you agree with publius, that it is not possible to know what it means to "follow Jesus"? Because if you do then that's a serious problem for your definition of FJC-Christian. You are essentially conceding that it is not possible to tell whether someone is an FJC-Christian or not.<br /><br />There's a difference between having finite approximations and having Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-24845389673168780102014-10-01T09:34:37.573-07:002014-10-01T09:34:37.573-07:00@Luke:
> So, I want to give Ron a bit more cre...<br />@Luke:<br /><br />> So, I want to give Ron a bit more credit for asking a legit question,<br /><br />Thank you.<br /><br />> but not actually hand him anything like a victory.<br /><br />I would like to think that this exchange is not a competition, but rather a cooperative effort towards a common goal of seeking the truth.<br /><br />> certain modes of 'interpretation' of Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-86111578356797144392014-10-01T09:33:50.064-07:002014-10-01T09:33:50.064-07:00@Publius:
> >What does it mean to "fol...@Publius:<br /><br />> >What does it mean to "follow Jesus Christ"?<br /><br />> You can know the answer to this question. It will take the rest of your life, and when you die, you still won't be certain what it means, but you'll know more than you know now.<br /><br />Did you meant to say that you CAN'T know the answer to this question? Because that's what itRonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-55490536303569717762014-10-01T08:54:05.511-07:002014-10-01T08:54:05.511-07:00> Oh, so no true scientist would believe those ...> Oh, so no true scientist would believe those things.<br /><br />I suggest trying to see Ron's definition as inherently <i>teleological</i>, requiring a <i>mind</i> to compute (note that he got frustrated when I tried to iron out definitions with him). This changes the form of No True Scotsman. I think it is really important that you're making this point; to it I would add that Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-25208789662033917752014-10-01T00:54:52.944-07:002014-10-01T00:54:52.944-07:00>> Mosaic Law ended when Jesus died on the c...>> Mosaic Law ended when Jesus died on the cross.<br /><br />>Says you. The Bible specifically warns against people saying this sort of thing (Deuteronomy 13).<br /><br />Jesus is divine. Deuteronomy 13 <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?st=2&search=matt%2028:18&version=NIV" rel="nofollow">doesn't apply.</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whac-A-Mole" rel=Publiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00647613579979908182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-60919531778454100622014-10-01T00:16:19.157-07:002014-10-01T00:16:19.157-07:00@Ron,
> So... if faith is essential, how shoul...@Ron,<br /><br />> So... if faith is essential, how should I decide which god to have faith in? There are so many to choose from.<br /><br />How do you choose to have a <i>telos</i> and what <i>telos</i> do you pick? <a href="http://biblehub.com/romans/10-4.htm" rel="nofollow">Rom 10:4</a> has: "For Christ is the <i>telos</i> of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." SoLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-86490221644878561082014-10-01T00:08:09.034-07:002014-10-01T00:08:09.034-07:00> To dispense with your little crutch of Mat 5:...> To dispense with your little crutch of Mat 5:18 - <b>Mosaic Law ended when Jesus died on the cross.</b><br /><br />This avoids the question of whether one can defend Mosaic Law as the probable output of an omniscient, omnipotent deity. I would argue that there is enough uncertainty about socio-economic-political conditions 2200+ years ago in a geography on the other side of the earth, to Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395549142176242491noreply@blogger.com