Re: Source Code for OS?

[pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <3A82C6D1.E8A2B687@qwest.net>, olcott  <olcott@qwest.net> wrote:
 
> Paul Schlyter wrote:
> 
>> In article <3A822F22.214626BE@qwest.net>, olcott  <olcott@qwest.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Truth itself is the final abiter...
>>
>> Of course ... and that's why the scientific method has been so very
>> successful: it queries Nature itself about facts, trying to rely as
>> little as possible on human interpretation.  And in trials, technical
>> evidence is considered more reliable than the storys told by
>> witnesses.
> 
> As I have said before Inductive inference is not reliable.
 
It's not infallible, of course, but it's the most reliable method
we have.  If that isn't reliable enough, nothing else will be either.
 
> According to Hinduism all of science is fasle, only
> magic is real... (Hindu Maya, paraphrase)...
 
If so, why do the Hindu's appear on the Internet?  They ought to believe
the Internet does not exist, or at least is noting to care about....
 
> Killing a fig tree in anger and spite for no useful purpose is not
> at all an accurate analogy to killing a tree for its wood.
 
That fig tree was perhaps "sacrificed"?  The bible is full if
sacrifices, mostly of small lambs which have done no-one any harm.
 
>> So how are we going to translate "anger", "love", etc into
>> measureable quantities so we can bypass human subjectivity and obtain
>> objective measures, to get at "the truth" directly.  Should we
> 
> Anger can be discerned from Kindness in the same way,
> and to the same degree that cold can be discerned from hot.
> Whneved someonme is pounding their fists in your face,
> their anger is utterly apparent.
 
So if I'm not pounding my fists in your, or anyone elses,
face, then you conclude I'm not angry?
 
Should "anger" be defined as the act of pounding your fists in
the face of others?
 
>> consider e.g.  adrenaline levels above a specific threshold value in
>> our bodies as "evil"?  If so, should it then too be punishable, e.g.
>> like if we were caught with illegal drugs in our blood?
>>
>> So the question remains: who, or what, should be the arbitrer?
>> "Truth itself" is useless here because "truth itself" cannot be
>> queried.
> 
> There exists a mathematical mapping from the term {anger}
> to the expressed emotion, likewise for {Love}...
 
I think your mapping is too simple-minded.  A lot of people express
their anger in other ways than pounding their fists in the face of
others.
 
 
> In your attempt make sure that it says that scripture says thats
> scripture itself is the word of God.
 
Roy already looked it up....  Anyway, I'm perfectly aware that the
argument "the bible is the word of god because the bible says the
bible is the word of god" is a circular argument.  If you're inside
that circle, you'll be stuck there - then you're a believer.  And if
you're not inside that circle, you'll find little reason to enter it.
 
I merely wanted to point out that you were wrong when you claimed
the bible nowhere said it was the word of god - it does.
 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se   or    paul.schlyter at ausys dot se
WWW:     http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch    http://welcome.to/pausch