In Reply to: Re: Hillbert's Hotel posted by MG on November 06, 2006 at 02:07:36:
MG wrote:
Interesting website. That's great you have the degrees. Can I ask you about something you say in your comments, because I don't want misinterpret you, and I don't want to jump to any conclusions and say you sound condescending, so, can you please explain the tone of: "to trot out" ... and "is very humorous too me"?
By the way, I first heard about Hillbert's Hotel from a Christian, Bible believing, theologian. (On a BBC radio documentary. I don't remember the name.) I'm not a mathemetician, I'm not very clever when it comes to science, but I do believe in infinite eternal realities, and when I heard the Hilbert Hotel idea I thought that's a clever way of giving infinity a mathematical description.
Craig himself doesn't seem to find Hilbert's idea humorous either. On the website article he says that Hilbert's Hotel is "a product of the mind of the great German mathematician, David Hilbert." He isn't condescending in his tone towards Mr. Hilbert, nor towards the Hilbert Hotel idea, and he uses the idea as a backdrop for presenting his own arguments which sound really great to me.
My time's run out. I don't have time to study the Craig article in depth right now, but it look pretty good. (Next month I won't be as busy.)
________________________________________________________________________________
MG:
Yeah; Craig’s pretty interesting. Glad you liked it. He cuts to the chase, which is VERY difficult in analytical philosophy, since a VERY slow and purposeful pace is usually required to follow complex arguments.
Whew! Reading in that field’s usually INCREDIBLY tedious and very labor-intensive, with a lot of “insider vocabulary” and “shorthand”; Craig uses a plainer manner of communication that I always appreciate and enjoy.
As to my sense of what is funny, to ME, of course, versus your suspicion of what you perceived as condescending, I did re-read what I wrote and could see the possible ambiguity you might have suspected. My apologies; sorry if you happened to take offense; NOT my intent.
On this site, despite its name, and because of the Coordinators’ usually arbitrary and preferential responses to any perceived conflict I may be involved in, where I have gotten into a lot of trouble for stating the obvious, that’s a given for me; the anti-Christian prejudice, the expectations of a lower intellect and of a higher hypocrisy quotient in Christians, and so on.
So, I tend to default to suspicion, myself. As in, are you setting me up, here, for more trouble with the Coordinators, and are you LOOKING to be offended at my off-handed comment (?), and do forth.
Those kinds of prejudices I do find amusing; yes. Others’ pat and uninformed comments on certain comments do, too.
The real deal was that there was an EARLIER “trotting out” of posted comments by a group trying to “one-up” each other as “nerds”.
“That was funny, I don’t care WHO you are”, as “Larry the Cable Guy” says on “Blue Collar Comedy”; if you’re familiar with it.
On-purpose obfuscation is funny to me, especially when at least one in the group has not “gotten it”, yet—the rest of the group is pulling his leg; which is how I saw their exchange; pretentiously “high-brow” silly stuff.
As to the humor of history, I regard the nearly willfully ignorant forgetting of history, and/or what CS Lewis called “Chronological Conceit”, as funny in a different vein; more like ironically pompous; like in “The Emperor’s New Clothes” story; still, funny to me.
People who disregard history are doomed to repeat its mistakes, as the saying goes, and people who assume that ONLY in THEIR era has there ever been any “real intelligence”, and so on, are both guilty of HUGE intellectual mistakes, and the usual pomposity of those of that point of view does amuse me; yes.
I have to laugh at myself, and do try to; it’s healthy. When I laugh at myself at something in my past, sometime I have cohorts in my mistaken thinking.
Berg disregarded history, and so did we as TFI members. He was the most pompously conceited fool I ever even HEARD of; beyond correction, or opposition of ANY kind. He CRUSHED those who dared to joke about him OR his belief system.
Those who emulate that type of treatment of others deserve deflation—that kind of thing is also very funny to me, as well; I LOVE to say “the Emperor has no clothes!”, and enjoy it when others do the same; don’t you?
I pointed out the very Berg-like quality of the Soviet atheists, their murder of people disagreeing with them, and so on.
Berg’s/Zerby’s beliefs are pompously and ridiculously touted in TFI. Exers learn, it is hoped, to think for themselves, as part of their recovery. The joke was on the Soviet atheists; yes, BECAUSE the Americans and Germanas DID think for themselves in many ways; ALL related to freedom of mind.
Atheism IS funny to me, as a belief system.
I have nothing against atheists themselves. To me, they’ve been conned, just like we were as TFI members. That is my own point of view; yes.
I do retain the right to question ANY and ALL belief systems, as a way of life, because of my past, and those who share my past should certainly understand that, whether or not my beliefs are currently popular.
Close logical and TRULY scientific analysis of atheism, I have seen, makes it unreasonable.
I used to be an adherent to that belief system, and left it behind even BEFORE TFI membership; that is an essential part of MY “Journey”, and I AM discussing it here objectively, and because you asked MY opnion.
I find silliness about atheism funny, especially the mock-certainty about it; that’s just MY sense of humor, in a Monty Python sort of way.
I do tend to otherwise be a little grim on certain subjects, and they need seasoning with that humor, for me.
So, sue me, for being different; right? ;-)
With respectful BUT humorous intent,
OT2 (OldtimerToo)