[PLUG-TALK] Michael, On the subject of God.

Jeme A Brelin jeme at brelin.net
Fri Nov 14 19:10:24 UTC 2003


On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Michael C. Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 10:13, Russ Johnson wrote:
> > And if he knows which one you will choose, you've just given up free
> > will. It also precludes "multiple possibilities".
> Now your just acting like Jeme.

Oh, fuck no.  Leave me out of this.

It's hard enough to just sit by and watch two dim, irrational people argue
a stupid, unknowable, hypothetical point without one telling the other
they are acting like you.

Just to throw in my worthless two cents on this here worthless discussion,
I'll go ahead and say that Michael's got the right idea and Russ is as
narrow-minded as ever, here.  While I personally think the nature (and,
indeed, existence) of anything supernatural is beyond the ken of the
natural by definition, I think it's possible to define a super-being as
being outside time and, hence, omniscient without diminishing the concept
of free will.

[Furthermore, I'd add that natural science alone destroys the concept of
free will all by itself.  No reason to turn to the supernatural when the
natural solution is right there.]

On the more interesting discussion -- though equally botched by Russ and
rightfully ignored by Michael who had a competent advocate, Paul nailed
the church/state argument on the head.  People are going to use their
religious beliefs in guiding their morals and their morals in guiding
their manipulation of the state as a coercive force.

I _think_ the point Russ is trying to make (to be very charitable and give
lots of credit where it might not be due) is that a person SHOULD (as a
matter of personal ethics, not of law) be able to distinguish between the
concepts of right and wrong that are required to maintain a civil and
productive society and the ideas of right and wrong that are arbitrary
impositions of their personal religious beliefs.  I mean to say that a
person should think about whether the law they propose or support is based
on ideas not present in the natural world.  I'm attempting to articulate
the ideas of someone else here, so I could be way off-base.

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org




More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list