Kim Jones wrote:
> The Templeton Foundation gives sizeable grants to projects for
> reconciling science and religion, and awards a yearly prize of two
> million dollars to a philosopher or scientist whose work highlights
> the "spiritual dimension of scientific progress."
>
> Go for it, Bruno! If Paul Davies can do it with a rather mediocre tome
> like "The Mind of God" - you will surely impress them with your
> machine theology - none of which they will understand, so it will
> surely command respect.
>
> Not a cynical suggestion; if the Templeton Foundation is anything
> beyond a perverse attempt to reward scientists who are prepared to say
> something nice about religion, then your setting this whole science/
> religion (physical sciences/human sciences; whatever) house in order
> will surely be worth the two million. And then you would be obliged to
> write a book about it all that will show the materialist/atheists a
> thing or two!
>
> Hands up if you think Bruno should apply for a Templeton grant!!! With
> two million in his bank balance, he might even come out to Australia
> to visit me and Russell!!!
Sure. Go for it, Bruno!
>
> What happened to Step 7, Doctor?
>
> warmest regards
>
> Kim
>
>
>
>
>
> Another annoying feature of the term "metaphysics" is that it has made
> it quasi-impossible for physicians to do metaphysics, since "meta"
> here has a sense corresponding to "meta" in metamathematics (the old
> name for Recursion Theory). Now, most physicians would argue (at least
> before the rise of the quantum) that such a "meta-physics" is simply
> physics. Which means: physicians, together with their laboratories and
> their libraries simply obey.... the laws of physics. OK, but when you
> say the same thing of quantum mechanics, you are now heading toward
> Everett and the Many-Worlds interpretation. Everett was the first
> serious "meta-physician" in that sense. Well, Galileo and Einstein
And your namesake, Giordano Bruno.
Brent
> (among others) also helped to prepare the terrain for this
> 'desanthropomorphisation' process. Embedding the subject into the
> object of study. Embedding the spectator in the spectacles, as the
> Hindu says. - Bruno Marchal
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Feb 04 2009 - 19:57:08 PST