From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Apr 22 20:20:20 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_5); 23 Apr 2003 03:20:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 92461 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2003 03:20:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Apr 2003 03:20:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Apr 2003 03:20:18 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 198Any-0003w7-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:20:18 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 198Anq-0003vn-00; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:20:10 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:20:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 198Anf-0003vI-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:19:59 -0700 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.6p2/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h3N3VEsr049078 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:31:15 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.6p2/8.12.3/Submit) id h3N3VEln049077 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:31:14 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:31:14 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: [OT] God Syndrome (OR: The why of 'why') Message-ID: <20030423033114.GA48759@allusion.net> References: <3EA588D8.29915.1B8B1B1@localhost> <20030423024138.74602.qmail@web10907.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030423024138.74602.qmail@web10907.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-archive-position: 4899 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 07:41:38PM -0700, Jon MacLeod wrote: > Please keep in mind that this is an off topic post, that has very little= to do > with Lojban in any way- although it does explain one of the reasons I dec= ided > to take up Lojban: My own language (and from what I can tell from talking= to > others, pretty much every other language in existence) does not have the = words > to describe the concept I am espousing below. >=20 > I will also be putting this (and any replies) up on the Wiki tommorow, i= f none > of you object, to avoid plaguing this group with OT posts. >=20 > Basically, the concept is: Where x is a person, y is an action, and z is= the > reason for the action, why does x do y for reason z? At first I thought you were basically asking "What is the cause of z". Your wording is ambiguous; it would be better to say "what causes z to cause [the event]?". First thing; get people out of this. People have nothing to do with anything; just confuses things. You only need two things then: event x and cause z. And the question "What causes z to cause x". I understand why you think the question still exists if you have a framework for explaining the cause of the cause. E.g. if say mechanics is the cause of the cause, you still can ask why does that cause the cause to cause what it caused (err). But obviously the science of mechanics didn't cause anything---it's merely an attempt to determine what is determinable about it. So my answer is na'i: (i) You can keep going out levels: if you could somehow discover what the cause is here, you have to ask, "why is that the cause" (or better worded "what caused that to be the cause"). It has to either stop somewhere, or be infinite---either way it's broken, because if it is infinite, then the answer to your original question is useless, because you have the same question all over again, and if it isn't infinite, it stops at some value for z with your question still askable, but unanswerable, and (ii) you can't discover it anyway, so this is a useless (xod would say "meaningless", I'm sure :) ) thing to discuss. I would also say that I don't see how concept of cause is in any way harmed by this, so I don't understand why you think there shouldn't be words for it or whatever it is.... [...] > Why did I call this 'God Syndrome'? Because I think that every religion, > including atheism, has tried, and failed, to explain what the 'why' is, a= nd > instead attribute the 'why' to God. Atheism attributes something to "god"? Heh. > (I am not saying God does not exist- I > personally believe there is absolute proof that at least one Diety exists= . I am > saying that the 'why' is equated with God in religion, where the two are = not, > in actuality, the same thing.) [...] Heh. I've met a lot of people who say they can prove that "God" exists. Most of them end up spitting out a "proof" which is already well known and also quite broken, and furthermore leaves the nature of the question in doubt by failing to adequately define what they mean when they say "God". Some are original though, for example the best one I've heard is the "proof" that Jesus spelled backwards sounds like Sausage, and that that just *can't* be a coincidence. Anyway, I'd like to hear you try, if you will. First, though, I'd ask you to define "Deity", before you "prove" that one exists. --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+pgkCDrrilS51AZ8RAttQAJ0TmPAcDGoVP1tnb540OTdmk4ynMwCbBQh9 NEzzB4rOpEd0Z91fM9wDDds= =g5Gb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z--