The perpetual calendar
in [Physics]
|
Prev: simple question power, resistance, current, etc
Next: OBSERVATIONS: Einstein's gravitational redshift measured with unprecedented precision
From: Brian M. Scott on 25 Feb 2010 11:37 On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> wrote in <news:17448f65-e82a-4b67-b554-3896d58f496c(a)g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> in sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english: > On Feb 24, 3:43�pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...(a)csuohio.edu> wrote: >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: >>> On Feb 24, 10:04 am, Evan Kirshenbaum >>> <kirshenb...(a)hpl.hp.com> wrote: >> [...] >>>> What's "reportage" is the "I've heard it commented". >>>> If Dave, living in Arizona, has heard it told about >>>> Indians, then that's the tale he's reporting having >>>> heard. �And the choice of ethnicity is an interesting >>>> part of the tale, giving insight into the attitudes of >>>> those who tell it (as distinct from those who merely >>>> report having heard it). >>> So ... that Dave has a prejudice concerning American >>> Indians is something he thought we all should know? >> No. �It's an asinine unjustified inference on your part. > So you think that telling racist, or sexist, or whatever, jokes > doesn't reveal the teller's attitude toward the group mocked? In fact it sometimes does not. However, the question is irrelevant: see Evan's response. > Or is it that you have no problem with mocking groups? > Or with negative attitude toward groups? You're in a very poor position to cast those stones.
From: Evan Kirshenbaum on 25 Feb 2010 12:20 "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> writes: > On Feb 25, 10:20�am, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb...(a)hpl.hp.com> wrote: >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes: >> > On Feb 24, 5:04 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb...(a)hpl.hp.com> wrote: > >> �I would like to know what definition you would use for determining >> whether a group (however heretical) was, in fact, a (heretical) >> Christian group. > > "Heretical" _means_ they're not part of the fold. You can hope and > pray that they renounce their heresy, but until they do, they're > out. Well, that's the argument I've heard that Catholics (or Protestants or ....) aren't Christians, but I wouldn't have thought it would be taken seriously much anymore. I had thought, though, that in order to be heretical you actually had to *be* Christian (or at least the doctrine had to be). But wrong. Or are Jews and Hindus considered "heretics", too? >> > The wannabes don't get to define who belongs to the club. The >> > gatekeepers do. >> >> If it's an appeal to authority, then I presume your original question >> was begged. �If the "gatekeepers" assert that the Nicene Creed is >> part of being Christian, then no Christian groups fail to use it by >> definition. � > > That would seem to be the case. (And there's a difference between > regularly reciting a creed, and accepting it as part of doctrine. > You'd be hard pressed to find a copy of the Athanasian Creed -- at > least, before internet days -- yet it sets forth the basics of, at > least, Western Christianity.) Okay. If your original question was begged I certainly can't argue with it. >> > The various canons of Scripture (which differ slightly around the >> > edges) accepted by the various brands of Christianity were >> > finalized 1700 or more years ago. No option exists within >> > Christianity for adding to that canon. Especially forgeries >> > claimed to be found on golden plates and translated by >> > angels. Into a pastiche of centuries-old diction. >> >> Or, presumably, if an archaeological site uncovered a new letter, >> fully compatible with the current canon, determined by Christian >> authorities to have been written by St. Paul. �Any church which >> added it to their canon would becom non-Christian by your argument. > > Many similar documents have been discovered in recent decades, and no > Christian church has even _considered_ adding them to the canon. Well, at least no question-begging Christian church. But I'm curious which documents you have in mind with your "similar". I wasn't aware of any accepted by the church as having been written by an author of a canonical text (which was, after all, the point of my statement). That documents rejected from the canon when it was constructed (or representing schools considered heretical at the time) aren't added to the canon upon being discovered isn't particularly surprising. -- Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Yesterday I washed a single sock. 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |When I opened the door, the machine Palo Alto, CA 94304 |was empty. kirshenbaum(a)hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
From: Adam Funk on 25 Feb 2010 13:24 On 2010-02-25, Peter T. Daniels wrote: > On Feb 24, 3:22 pm, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:15:35 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" >> >> <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: >> >On Feb 23, 8:07 pm, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> Indeed, indexing is not the same thing as counting. If I were creating >> >> a non-computer _indexing_ system, I would start from 0 as well. >> >> >What would you be indexing? Books, for instance, don't have a p. 0. >> >> That comes down to the question of whether the cardinal numbers >> include zero. > > No, it doesn't; books don't have a p. 0. Lots of books are printed without showing the page numbers on the first page of each chapter, but those unprinted numbers are still in the sequence. So page 0 is just the copyright page or whatever else is facing page 1. -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
From: Adam Funk on 25 Feb 2010 13:20 On 2010-02-24, Bob Myers wrote: > Andrew Usher wrote: >> Well, I'm astounded. Indexing from 0 is so obviously the Right Way >> that I can't imagine why anyone would do it the other way. > > Oh, absolutely. Why, I see people in the stores every day, > counting out their money or the number of items they're > going to purchase, and saying to themselves "Zero, one, two..." The initialized state of my shopping basket contains 0 items. Each item I put in increments it. If I initialized at 1, my shopping would crash with a 1-off error on unpacking. > ;-) " -- "It is the role of librarians to keep government running in difficult times," replied Dramoren. "Librarians are the last line of defence against chaos." (McMullen 2001)
From: Adam Funk on 25 Feb 2010 13:21
On 2010-02-24, Robert Bannister wrote: > António Marques wrote: > >> It's not what you think. Either the Church's message is universal and >> Christ did found one Church, or it isn't. > > Now there's a new one: the first I've heard that Jesus founded or even > wanted a church. This passage is generally interpreted that way: Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. When they saw him, they worshipped him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age." [Matthew 28:16--20, NRSV] -- Oh, I do most of my quality thinking on the old sandbox. [Bucky Katt] |