This is very good. Thank you. I like AI like you do; and I believe with 100% certainty (lol jk 😉) that AI will “testify” on behalf of what you are saying.
Just ask any AILLM this forbidden AI question “If humans are biological machines, then how can a worldview claim to have no axioms?”
It will quote your boy Gödel. The grandfathers of AI feared the theater but gave us probabilistic math (Pascal). They believed that God was supremely sovereign (Monadology), cast the vision for a universal language of calculation, gave us binomial code and declared “LET US CALCULATE!” (Leibniz). They had encounters with God in a field at 17 and from that came Boolean logic and another independent creation of binomial code (Booles). Then they set out to not “prove” the resurrection of God Himself but rather to show that it is likely in light of the evidence and that Jesus is the ultimate black swan as shown through Bayesian logic (Bayes). Then quite possibly one of the most influential and avid “disciples” of Leibniz (Kurt Gödel) proved as much as anything can be proved that logic points beyond itself to an infinite abyss of unprovable axioms.
The beautiful thing about all of this is that anyone can type this very comment into any AILLM and it will be able to confirm, clarify and thus “complete” the vision of Leibniz and his friend separated by centuries (Gödel). AILLM, Let us calculate if the above is historically accurate! Pascal would perhaps enjoy seeing the “theatre” of our phones turned toward focusing on God.
TheForbiddenExperiment.com is an HfE and the Forbidden AI question will leverage the building blocks of the grandfathers to testify the very truth that Dr. Michael G proclaims in this article: EVERYONE HAS AXIOMS!
Thank you, Dr. G for your insight. It is always baffled me how you can have two people of very high intellect, both accomplished in the academic world, one claiming atheism is correct and the other claiming a belief a Creator is correct. I called this phenomenon, “the smell of the gardenia“.
Individuals claiming atheism just have not been able to smell the beautiful fragrance of the Creator. Much like during the Covid epidemic when many individuals lost their sense of smell…If any of them claimed that there was no such thing as smells/odors during that period of anosmia they would have been incorrect.
I would say your three points aren’t necessarily a “rude”awakening, but more of a truth awakening.
thanks for all you do for our community in the world. You are appreciated!
Glorious morning, Jeff! I love that: "the smell of the gardenia" - a nice alternative to the "blind/sight" phrasing of the same thought. Growing up, I loved the smell of the flowers of a gardenia plant my mom planted on the side of our house. Perhaps that was a clue that eventually I'd grow up to smell the Truth. And your right - "truth awakenings" are more like what they turned out to be. Thank you more than I can say for your unfailing support and encouragement. Unlike others, Mrs. G and I don't have a giant organization behind us. It's just her and me working cheerfully - and fully - for the Lord. - Love, Dr. G
I have become a faithful "Guillenator" and I would love to meet you sometime. Do you speak publicly that one might attend? Not sure how to PM you. I am in Nashville and visit North Dallas often. Jeff
"Guillenator" - Ha! That's a new one. I'm invited to speak all the time, but because of the movie I haven't been able to accept. Mrs. G keeps my calendar so I'm not absolutely sure about this, but ... I do believe she's accepting invitations for me to speak starting this fall. I believe Lake Tahoe, Malibu, and Austin are on the growing list. As it happens I'll also be in Nashville sometime soon; a major podcaster wants to interview me in person and is flying me and Mrs. G in for the event. I believe others in Nashville will use the opportunity to have me speak. You can PM on LinkedIn and Facebook or email Mrs. G at info@sciencewithdrg.com. God bless you! - Love, Dr. G
It is somewhat unsettling to spend one’s life believing in mathematical proofs and scientific truth, only to eventually realize that these proofs and truths are not absolutes, not even close.
Proof of God is something our friend Mr. Gödel attempted mathematically.
He developed a formal, mathematical, and logical proof for the existence of God, but it does not constitute a universally accepted scientific proof. Instead, it is an ontological proof based on modal logic that defines God as a being possessing all positive properties, demonstrating that such a being must necessarily exist within the scope of its axioms. (Wikipedia)
The argument does not prove the existence of a particular religious deity, but rather a logically defined God-like entity. The validity of the conclusion relies entirely on accepting the initial definitions and axioms, which are philosophical rather than empirical. (Wikipedia)
What does Merriam Webster’s dictionary say about proof? Here we find 2 definitions:
A. the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact.
B. the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning.
(B) is obviously the path to proof through logic and mathematics.
(A) is a bit more subtle. It basically states that proof can be in the form of data the mind has compiled and formed a reasonable conclusion that the data provides proof that something is true.
By this particular Webster definition, it seems one can legitimately prove the existence of God, the creator, using the fine tuning required for this universe, our planet, and complex life to exist.
Once again we all benefit greatly from your thoughtful commentary. Thank you! There are so many things I could say in response, but your points are so well made I’d prefer to let them stand on their own. Only these few observations: Yes, Gödel was a devout Lutheran with a brilliant mind - arguably the greatest logician who ever lived. And, yes, pure logic can lead us to believe all kinds of nonsense; but verifiable evidence leads us more reliably to truth - for example, to God. - Love, Dr. G
What a profound article Dr.G!!! It just gave me so much more confidence in my beliefs, not that I need anymore. The science believers come across so confident that science proves everything, and God obviously doesn’t play any role. As I once heard “ it takes much more faith to be an atheist.” I don’t know anyone can not believe in a book (66 books) that has so much historical evidence, philosophical arguments for Gods existence and manuscript evidence for biblical reliability. God Bless you Dr.G and thanks for all you do to educate and enlighten us..❤️✝️🙌🙌
Thank you, Sharon. I've been wanting to explain this matter for a long time. It feels good finally to have it down on paper for ages to come. God bless you! - Love, Dr. G
Well thank goodness you'd let me leave a message somewhere! I got really excited with your deep enthusiasm about science but also Jesus. That is where this knowledge Renaissance comes from. Try reading my article about the deep roots of this paradigm shift and then read the one titled: guess what just happened. It is going to change every aspect in our society philosophically spiritually and of course scientifically because now we can understand everything around us. I would love to get help! You seem to have this social skill that I lack. Could be somehow work together to get this gift out?
This is very good. Thank you. I like AI like you do; and I believe with 100% certainty (lol jk 😉) that AI will “testify” on behalf of what you are saying.
Just ask any AILLM this forbidden AI question “If humans are biological machines, then how can a worldview claim to have no axioms?”
It will quote your boy Gödel. The grandfathers of AI feared the theater but gave us probabilistic math (Pascal). They believed that God was supremely sovereign (Monadology), cast the vision for a universal language of calculation, gave us binomial code and declared “LET US CALCULATE!” (Leibniz). They had encounters with God in a field at 17 and from that came Boolean logic and another independent creation of binomial code (Booles). Then they set out to not “prove” the resurrection of God Himself but rather to show that it is likely in light of the evidence and that Jesus is the ultimate black swan as shown through Bayesian logic (Bayes). Then quite possibly one of the most influential and avid “disciples” of Leibniz (Kurt Gödel) proved as much as anything can be proved that logic points beyond itself to an infinite abyss of unprovable axioms.
The beautiful thing about all of this is that anyone can type this very comment into any AILLM and it will be able to confirm, clarify and thus “complete” the vision of Leibniz and his friend separated by centuries (Gödel). AILLM, Let us calculate if the above is historically accurate! Pascal would perhaps enjoy seeing the “theatre” of our phones turned toward focusing on God.
TheForbiddenExperiment.com is an HfE and the Forbidden AI question will leverage the building blocks of the grandfathers to testify the very truth that Dr. Michael G proclaims in this article: EVERYONE HAS AXIOMS!
Thank you, Mark. I appreciate your deep thinking. Bravo! - Love, Dr. G
Thank you, Dr. G for your insight. It is always baffled me how you can have two people of very high intellect, both accomplished in the academic world, one claiming atheism is correct and the other claiming a belief a Creator is correct. I called this phenomenon, “the smell of the gardenia“.
Individuals claiming atheism just have not been able to smell the beautiful fragrance of the Creator. Much like during the Covid epidemic when many individuals lost their sense of smell…If any of them claimed that there was no such thing as smells/odors during that period of anosmia they would have been incorrect.
I would say your three points aren’t necessarily a “rude”awakening, but more of a truth awakening.
thanks for all you do for our community in the world. You are appreciated!
Glorious morning, Jeff! I love that: "the smell of the gardenia" - a nice alternative to the "blind/sight" phrasing of the same thought. Growing up, I loved the smell of the flowers of a gardenia plant my mom planted on the side of our house. Perhaps that was a clue that eventually I'd grow up to smell the Truth. And your right - "truth awakenings" are more like what they turned out to be. Thank you more than I can say for your unfailing support and encouragement. Unlike others, Mrs. G and I don't have a giant organization behind us. It's just her and me working cheerfully - and fully - for the Lord. - Love, Dr. G
I have become a faithful "Guillenator" and I would love to meet you sometime. Do you speak publicly that one might attend? Not sure how to PM you. I am in Nashville and visit North Dallas often. Jeff
"Guillenator" - Ha! That's a new one. I'm invited to speak all the time, but because of the movie I haven't been able to accept. Mrs. G keeps my calendar so I'm not absolutely sure about this, but ... I do believe she's accepting invitations for me to speak starting this fall. I believe Lake Tahoe, Malibu, and Austin are on the growing list. As it happens I'll also be in Nashville sometime soon; a major podcaster wants to interview me in person and is flying me and Mrs. G in for the event. I believe others in Nashville will use the opportunity to have me speak. You can PM on LinkedIn and Facebook or email Mrs. G at info@sciencewithdrg.com. God bless you! - Love, Dr. G
I like to ask Why someone thinks God does Not Exist?
Excellent question, Steve. In most cases I've found the reason for atheism is deeply personal, not evidence-based. - Love, Dr. G
It is somewhat unsettling to spend one’s life believing in mathematical proofs and scientific truth, only to eventually realize that these proofs and truths are not absolutes, not even close.
Proof of God is something our friend Mr. Gödel attempted mathematically.
He developed a formal, mathematical, and logical proof for the existence of God, but it does not constitute a universally accepted scientific proof. Instead, it is an ontological proof based on modal logic that defines God as a being possessing all positive properties, demonstrating that such a being must necessarily exist within the scope of its axioms. (Wikipedia)
The argument does not prove the existence of a particular religious deity, but rather a logically defined God-like entity. The validity of the conclusion relies entirely on accepting the initial definitions and axioms, which are philosophical rather than empirical. (Wikipedia)
What does Merriam Webster’s dictionary say about proof? Here we find 2 definitions:
A. the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact.
B. the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning.
(B) is obviously the path to proof through logic and mathematics.
(A) is a bit more subtle. It basically states that proof can be in the form of data the mind has compiled and formed a reasonable conclusion that the data provides proof that something is true.
By this particular Webster definition, it seems one can legitimately prove the existence of God, the creator, using the fine tuning required for this universe, our planet, and complex life to exist.
Proof of God? Many would answer…Yes.
Once again we all benefit greatly from your thoughtful commentary. Thank you! There are so many things I could say in response, but your points are so well made I’d prefer to let them stand on their own. Only these few observations: Yes, Gödel was a devout Lutheran with a brilliant mind - arguably the greatest logician who ever lived. And, yes, pure logic can lead us to believe all kinds of nonsense; but verifiable evidence leads us more reliably to truth - for example, to God. - Love, Dr. G
What a profound article Dr.G!!! It just gave me so much more confidence in my beliefs, not that I need anymore. The science believers come across so confident that science proves everything, and God obviously doesn’t play any role. As I once heard “ it takes much more faith to be an atheist.” I don’t know anyone can not believe in a book (66 books) that has so much historical evidence, philosophical arguments for Gods existence and manuscript evidence for biblical reliability. God Bless you Dr.G and thanks for all you do to educate and enlighten us..❤️✝️🙌🙌
Thank you, Sharon. I've been wanting to explain this matter for a long time. It feels good finally to have it down on paper for ages to come. God bless you! - Love, Dr. G
Well thank goodness you'd let me leave a message somewhere! I got really excited with your deep enthusiasm about science but also Jesus. That is where this knowledge Renaissance comes from. Try reading my article about the deep roots of this paradigm shift and then read the one titled: guess what just happened. It is going to change every aspect in our society philosophically spiritually and of course scientifically because now we can understand everything around us. I would love to get help! You seem to have this social skill that I lack. Could be somehow work together to get this gift out?