On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 13:41:20 GMT, "Richard Hertz"
wrote:

Hose****.

Starting with fallacy. Not a good sign...

I did not mix terms - I used the term that someone else used and asked for
elaboration. Not my confusion.

OK, Usenet attribution mea culpa.

Um, but the shortest distance between two points is STILL a stright line...
Unfortunately you can't travel through the earth.

....thus necessitating the use of non-Euclidean geometries. Don't
forget that the point of philosophy really is to come up with useful
stuff.

I asked for which basic tenet was unprovable. My point was that the
original poster of this math == religion thread was not making sense.
There is nothing similar about them.
[...]
I still don't see how that is anything like religion.

The single undeniable similarity between math and religion is that
they are both philosophical systems, based on unproved (and maybe
unprovable) axioms and definitions.

Math: "A 'point' is defined as..."
Math: "The set of 'Integers' is defined as..."

(Aristotlean) Religion: "'God' is defined as..."
(Aristotlean) Religion: "'Sin' is defined as..."

You're right, of course, if you want to say that the similarity ends
there. But IMO involving the Incompleteness Theorem when talking about
complex axiomatic[1] systems is perfectly valid. The systems are
axiomatic and complex, whether you use the language of religion or the
language of mathematics to describe them. *Especially* orthodox
Christianity, whose apologist Thomas Aquinas (I'm told), made enough
of a significant case for basing scriptural understanding on
Aristotlean philosophical underpinnings that the comparison is
unavoidable.

Mathematics is also based on Euclidean rules of reasoning, the same
rules Aristotle used to build his thoughts. Therefore comparing the
two is not invalid.

you have just tried to make the whole bit
sound more complicated than it is.

So I have. It's because I believe that it is a far more complicated
problem than a blanket dismissal of "religion" can solve.

And I am sure we are all impressed with
the disussion or Euclid, Theorems, incompleteness, etc.

I hope so! It was more than a little bit of work.

Rob
[1] In theology I suppose they'd call it "dogmatic"

--
[You] don't make your kids P.C.-proof by keeping them
ignorant, you do it by helping them learn how to
educate themselves.

-- Orson Scott Card