Re: virus: religion

Brett Robertson (BrettMan35@webtv.net)
Wed, 15 Apr 1998 18:26:58 -0500


Were we talking about logical positivism on this list? Anyway, an
argument for god which is not based on ontology would be-- loosely-- a
logical positivistic argument (this is also similar to pragmatics, I
think). That is, even assuming there is no a priori god; why cannot
there be a post posteriori argument for a "synthetic" god. Or, can we
not theorize that there is an end-product which satisfies the
pre-determined criteria for godliness... and then, can't we design a
logical progression which results in this potentiality.

Is there a *possibility* of designing a god. Can we do this through
computer programing, for example? Or is the possibility non-existent?
Isn't this the starting assumption (non-existent) which assures us that
the synthetic knowledge of such an end-product *circularly* confirms the
beginning assumption?

If there is not a potentially perfect state toward whcih we might aspire
and by which we might order our incremental steps to allign with that
eventuality (well, perfect within the limits of what is possible--
again, circularly determined); then, what is it that we aspire toward
(imperfection, chaos, mediocracy)?

I present this argument for the potentiality of "choosing" the future
existence of an ideal form which satisfies the argument *for* god. But
then, I might ask... have these requirements not been met on another
level (the level of mind, the level of organic chemistry, the sociatal
level, the universal)? If not, how is it that we might aspire towards
these ends... how can we theorize (or negate) such a possibility?

Brett Lane Robertson
Indiana, USA
www.window.to/mindrec