No, nor I.
The debate was rather forced on me. God kept being introduced as a
factor whose wishes are established but who is never available to
validate his own pronouncements. (The head of Customer Care at EDF is
rather similar.)
I'm not sure that it was a good comparison. The best similarity of
the God debate that has occurred to me was a friend of mine, a UK
friend, who had spent some years in Israel and defended it, that sort
of slippery defence that says _I agree with you there is a lot wrong
with Israel_
One day he shouted at me that the foundation of Israel had been an
assertion of racial exceptionalism / superiority. And when I asked him
to debate it, he told me that I wouldn't understand because I am not
Jewish. I tried to suppress a look of triumpth, but I don't think he
understood
My I Q went down as I got older; and then it went up.
Heh ho
L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Poetryetc: poetry and poetics"
To:
Cc:
Sent:Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:55:46 -0000
Subject:Re: gay and 7 and IQ
Perhaps god only exists up to 10points -But I have never met the guy
-----Original Message-----
From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Lawrence Upton
Sent: 14 November 2012 10:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: gay and 7 and IQ
I was listening to an exchange, I suppose you would call it, on a
specialist radio programme. One side said that the problem with I Q
testing is that if you repeat the test you get a different answer by
up to 10 pts which is worrying. It may be generally indicative; but it
is not precise
I was debating or trying to debate the existence of God the other day
and the main pro God argument seemed to be that I did not understand
ttfn
L
>It did occur to me that the IQ wouldn't be understood
>It gets complex and involves relation of forces... a statistical
figure is not an identified number, but a force vector. So a specific
example cannot be given unlike the sort stuff that follows Aristotle
confused as neo-Platonist
>There is a lot of myth around IQ testing saying it is all cultural,
but that is ignorant crap, of course. IQ is not a category and to say
so confuses index and category.
On 07/11/12 03:38, Lawrence Upton wrote:
> That's about it, I think.
|