Should God be replaced? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: James Calladine who wrote (9246)	1/5/2002 2:50:28 PM
From: Bill Fischofer	Read Replies (1) of 28931

Actually, that in itself doesn't help. St. Thomas Aquinas says it can, others say it can't. Big debate. No progress. To be able to say anything sensible on the subject one has to be precise about what one means by "God" and "proof". While most folks agree that the former is a very slippery concept many are surprised to discover that the latter is as well. See dictionary.com* for some commonly accepted definitions of the word. Mathematically speaking, a proof is a procedure, a "roadmap" if you will, for applying a set of previously agreed to rules of inference to a set of premises to reach a conclusion. For brevity's sake, unless otherwise stipulated the standard rules of inference of mathematical logic are assumed. See philosophypages.com for examples of these sorts of rules. The problem with proofs is that the more "steps" there are to the proof the easier it is to make a misstep and hence complex proofs are in many ways as much sociological exercises as they are mathematical. This is one of the reasons why proofs to famous problems like Fermat's Last Theorem took so long to develop. See pbs.org for the fascinating story of this problem and its solution. So the absence of a proof is by itself not material. To prove that no proof of the existence of God is possible would be another matter but my guess is Adi Da has not done this either. Certainly any real proof on this subject would attract worldwide attention. My personal view is that God did not give us reason as an impediment to knowing Him. I therefore believe that anything worthy of the name "God" will satisfy the whole man, not just select parts. This will be necessary if science and spirituality are ever to be fully reconciled.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next