Ham

Bertrand Russel tried the approach of Logic and some kind of basis of only rule for Faith and Practice- mathematically speaking. But his research came up with one Paradox after another. Whos career did he ruin at the last moment.. just as the book was ready for press. Can't remember the name at the moment. I think Christians regard him as some kind of heretic, Godless unbeliever. History shows he hated violence and Mob Rule. Would not follow a politically motivated mob to embrace yet one more Godless War. I think that he was a true Christian. I think that Godel shows us the way out of all of this, Philosophically, Theologically and Mathematically. How do we apply this to Biblical Truth. I don't entirely know. There is a Larger System than Us. Before Godel, there was Cantor. Cantor rattled their cages.

I like the simpler questions, like Where did we all come from? I kind of like the idea that we were all one, at least at one time. Yep, here comes more new age stream of consciousness BS. Imagine a World where one can Magically summon whatever one desires- law of believing. I like to give the reply to the question, "what do you want" with "Nothing. I already have far more that than I need."

Heh...me too.

I hope that the audience does not object to this Stream of Consciousness one post after another proceeding.. :L) You know.. human nature and understanding is so what's the word.. depraved? Merely by agreeing to some definition of God or reality we seem to alter the rules of the game. Usually not for the better. Even trying to improve this existence.

In a weird sense, I think Math might be Religion. Certainly has a lot of the same characteristics. Now the Postulates of Religion. There is one God. I don't necessarily think that the Creator of the universe is a projection of my psyche.. Is Math a tool or guide. I think neither. It provides tools.. and maybe logical guidance. Religion. Is it a tool or guide? Definitely a guide. There are a definite number of Postulates and common assumptions one must agree with in order to proceed to the Next Phase of the Operation..

Math is EASY compared to this argument. Far easier to watch someone go through a circular pattern of logic uses the conclusion to prove the premises.

I have watched at least one professor try to justify the Pythagorean Theorem from Trigonometric Identities. Pretty much circular logic. If one takes the formula for distance as an Axiom, the problem is supposedly solved..

Learning is pretty much Axiomatic. Sounds complicated, but not really- one assumes that a few set of rules or tenets are true, or commonly agreed upon. And include agreeable assumptions. Then you build your whole existence or Theology based on these few "irrefutable" truths.. Euclid's successors figured that they could explain it all without being able to draw a straight line.. they abandoned the parallel postulate. Some fantastic results followed. But it did not explain everything. Then come Godel. The tenets of any closed mathematical system cannot be proved by the axioms of the system. Some among us are trying to do the impossible here.. Some think that the Axioms are sacrosanct. But Axioms are pretty much self-assured truths. They only have relevance if one assigns it to them. Same works for Religion.

I suppose add it anywhere you can. The little hole might work. Otherwise, if the result is horrid- just toss a few teaspoons directly into the pot. Now as for removing lipstick stains- that is another kettle of fish, so to speak.

One applies a few sprinkles of salt. Then don't forget. How do you remove lipstick stains from Styrofoam cups? Carefully, very carefully.

I could write a program in Java or C or C++. Calculate the square root of 2 to 4 decimal places. If the computer could think- it would think 1, 4, 1, 4, 2. I don't think it would have the capacity to figure out what the heck I was really asking it to do. I don't think it could figure out that I was looking for the length of the legs of a triangle with hypontenuse of length of one unit. In this case the program would be an extension of my will, looking for a decimal approximation of a non repeating non terminating decimal. If the computer can reverse engineer the process, I would change my mind here.

Partial Quote. I disagree. Computer programs are purely an extension of the human will. At Least in my opinion. Of course the program has to adhere to logic to run.. We may call it Artificial Intelligence, but (in my opinion) it is unbridled human intelligence in action.

Enlightenment does have a cost..

Yet there is no Easy way out.

Some of the Hippies were tired of being Enlightened. Worn out. Done. I think that, they were looking for an easy way out of all of this..