Re: Why be in the Philosophy of Religion

[Julian Pardoe <jbdp@cix.compulink.co.uk>]

In-Reply-To: <199801120328.DAA07505@mail-relay.compulink.co.uk>
I wish I had the Book.  This is just crying out be to translated
into Lojban!  Maybe I'll try later.  It would be a good
exercise.

Anyway I was forwarding this to a friend who is an amateur
theologian and professional physicist (well, materials scientist
and these days more administrator than scientist, universities
being what they are).  I was just going to say that I suspect
souls don't have mass, but...

Still, I feel that the initial assumption that souls have mass
is wrong.  Furthermore the fact that the author and Theresa
Banyan have not yet had sexual relations does not mean that they
never will and so we cannot be certain that there won't be a
cold night in Hell until one of them dies (and, depending on
your view of things, maybe not even then).

In any case, there might be a cold night in Hell for other
reasons.  If TB's "postulate" is right it means that from the
occurrence of the sexual relations in question we can deduce
that it is a cold night in Hell, i.e.
   sex (author,TB) => cold (hell)
This does not allow us to deduce that if they haven't it isn't.
>From the above can cannot deduce that
   ~sex (author,TB) => ~cold (hell)
but only that
   ~cold (hell) => ~sex (author,TB)

An elementary error of logic: I'm not sure the student deserved
that A!

-- jP --