|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MrsAdams
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: in hiding
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 11:51 am Post subject: Creater of Pearl talks about Religion |
 |
|
Larry Wall is the creator of Pearl scripting language. The following is from an interview with him on Slashdot. I just thought someone might be interested, given the recent topics on religion.
| Quote: |
I remember reading at some point that you are a Christian, and there have been suggestions that some of your early missionary impulses (a desire to do good, help others) are perhaps part of the zeal you have put into Perl over the years.
Preferring a scientific view, I am not religious, and have no desire to be. Perhaps there is a God, but if there is, I think he/she has no opposable thumbs; in other words, has no power to change anything; reality is just playing out according to the laws of physics (whatever those are).
Please tell us how in the world a scientific or at least technical mind can believe in God, and what role religion has played in your work on Perl.
A:
Well, hmm, that's a topic for an entire essay, or a book, or a life. But I'll try to keep it short.
When you say "how in the world", I take it to mean that you find it more or less inconceivable that someone with a scientific mind (or at least technical mind, hah!) could chooose to believe in God. I'd like to at least get you to the point where you find it conceivable. I expect a good deal of the problem is that you are busy disbelieving a different God than the one I am busy believing in. In theological discussions more than any other kind, it's easy to talk at right angles and never even realize it.
So let me try to clarify what I mean, and reduce it to as few information bits as possible. A lot of people have a vested interest in making this a lot tougher to swallow than it needs to be, but it's supposed to be simple enough that a child can understand it. It doesn't take great energetic gobs of faith on your part--after all, Jesus said you only have to have faith the size of a mustard seed. So just how big is that, in information theory terms? I think it's just two bits big. Please allow me to qoute a couple "bits" from Hebrews, slightly paraphrased:
You can't please God the way Enoch did without some faith, because those who come to God must (minimally) believe that:
A) God exists, and
B) God is good to people who really look for him.
That's it. The "good news" is so simple that a child can understand it, and so deep that a philosopher can't.
Now, it appears that you're willing to admit the possibility of bit A being a 1, so you're almost halfway there. Or maybe you're a quarter way there on average, if it's a qubit that's still flopping around like Shoedinger's Cat. You're the observer there, not me--unless of course you're dead. 
A lot of folks get hung up at point B for various reasons, some logical and some moral, but mostly because of Shroedinger again. People are almost afraid to observe the B qubit because they don't want the wave function to collapse either to a 0 or a 1, since both choices are deemed unpalatable. A lot of people who claim to be agnostics don't take the position so much because they don't know, but because they don't want to know, sometimes desperately so.
Because if it turns out to be a 0, then we really are the slaves of our selfish genes, and there's no basis for morality other than various forms of tribalism.
And because if it turns out to be a 1, then you have swallow a whole bunch of flim-flam that goes with it. Or do you?
Let me admit to you that I came at this from the opposite direction. I grew up in a religious culture, and I had to learn to "unswallow" an awful lot of stuff in order to strip my faith down to these two bits.
I tried to strip it down further, but I couldn't, because God told me: "That's far enough. I already flipped your faith bits to 1, because I'm a better Observer than you are. You are Shroedinger's cat in reverse--you were dead spiritually, but I've already examined the qubits for you, and I think they're both 1. Who are you to disagree with me?"
So, who am I to disagree with God? If he really is the Author of the universe, he's allowed to observe the qubits, and he's probably even allowed to cheat occasionally and force a few bit flips to make it a better story. That's how Authors work. Whether or not they have thumbs...
Once you see the universe from that point of view, many arguments fade into unimportance, such as Hawking's argument that the universe fuzzed into existence at the beginning, and therefore there was no creator. But it's also true that the Lord of the Rings fuzzed into existence, and that doesn't mean it doesn't have a creator. It just means that the creator doesn't create on the same schedule as the creature's.
If God is creating the universe sideways like an Author, then the proper place to look for the effects of that is not at the fuzzy edges, but at the heart of the story. And I am personally convinced that Jesus stands at the heart of the story. The evidence is there if you care to look, and if you don't get distracted by the claims of various people who have various agendas to lead you in every possible direction, and if you don't fall into the trap of looking for a formula rather than looking for God as a person. All human institutions are fallible, and will create a formula for you to determine whether you belong to the tribe or not. Very often these formulas are called doctrines and traditions and such, and there is some value in them, as there is some value in any human culture. But they all kind of miss the point.
"Systematic theology" is an oxymoron. God is not a system. Christians are fond of asking: "What would Jesus do in this situation?" Unfortunately, they very rarely come up with the correct answer, which is: "Something unexpected!" If the Creator really did write himself into his own story, that's what we ought to expect to see. Creative solutions.
And this creativity is intended to be transitive. We are expected to be creative. And we're expected to help others be creative.
And that leads us back (finally) to the last part of your question, how all this relates to Perl.
Perl is obviously my attempt to help other people be creative. In my little way, I'm sneakily helping people understand a bit more about the sort of people God likes.
Going further, we have the notion that a narrative should be defined by its heart and not by its borders. That ties in with my linguistic notions that things ought to be defined by prototype rather than by formula. It ties in to my refusal to define who is or is not a "good" Perl programmer, or who exactly is or isn't a member of the "Perl community". These things are all defined by their centers, not by their peripheries.
The philosophy of TMTOWTDI ("There's more than one way to do it.") is a direct result of observing that the Author of the universe is humble, and chooses to exercise control in subtle rather than in heavy-handed ways. The universe doesn't come with enforced style guidelines. Creative people will develop style on their own. Those are the sort of people that will make heaven a nice place.
And finally, there is the underlying conviction that, if you define both science and religion from their true centers, they cannot be in confict. So despite all the "religiosity" of Perl culture, we also believe in the benefits of computer science. I didn't put lexicals and closures into Perl5 just because I thought people would start jumping up and down and shouting "Hallelujah!" (Which happens, but that's not why I did it.)
And now let's all sing hymn #42... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dogshed
Joined: 28 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The language is Perl not Pearl. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faster
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 3:50 pm Post subject: Re: Creater of Pearl talks about Religion |
|
|
| Larry Wall wrote: |
| Because if it turns out to be a 0, then we really are the slaves of our selfish genes, and there's no basis for morality other than various forms of tribalism. |
His thinking is lovely, and he's clearly a very reasonable man, but the above caught my eye.
This is a common fallacy in the religious world.
Recent studies have shown pleasure center stimulation in the human brain reacts MORE to generosity behavior than selfishness behavior. That alone is a serviceable root of morality.
Since we now know that language is hard-wired into our brains, it's not unreasonable to assume that we have some built-in affinity for "moral" behavior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:03 pm Post subject: Re: Creater of Pearl talks about Religion |
|
|
| MrsAdams wrote: |
| Quote: |
So, who am I to disagree with God? If he really is the Author of the universe, he's allowed to observe the qubits, and he's probably even allowed to cheat occasionally and force a few bit flips to make it a better story. That's how Authors work. Whether or not they have thumbs...
Once you see the universe from that point of view, many arguments fade into unimportance, such as Hawking's argument that the universe fuzzed into existence at the beginning, and therefore there was no creator. But it's also true that the Lord of the Rings fuzzed into existence, and that doesn't mean it doesn't have a creator. It just means that the creator doesn't create on the same schedule as the creature's. |
|
Tolkien had a creator, who is God's creator?
A book wasn't always a book, it was created from stuff such as trees, ink, and imagination. Many believe God created the universe but that doesn't answer how and what was used. It is not an answer to say 'God did it', that answer might make you happy and let you get on with life, but you've learnt nothing. The things we see around us were created from something else using known processes if a theist can't explain the processes they claim are happening or happened then is it worthy of consideration? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tjames426
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Tolkien had a creator, who is God's creator? "
___
Once again, people assume that your straw man <made up> definition of "God" is what the classical understanding is. It isn't.
As a Christian, I reject your implication that "the Creator" needs a creator.
I know this is hard for someone who is a materialist. But....
The Creator God does not live within the bounds of a "space linear time dimension." Thus, the idea of the Creator needing a Creator is illogical.
I know that is a difficult concept to grasp for a "finite" materialistic focused mind. But once you do, you might start asking useful questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tjames426 wrote: |
"Tolkien had a creator, who is God's creator? "
___
Once again, people assume that your straw man <made up> definition of "God" is what the classical understanding is. It isn't.
As a Christian, I reject your implication that "the Creator" needs a creator.
I know this is hard for someone who is a materialist. But....
The Creator God does not live within the bounds of a "space linear time dimension." Thus, the idea of the Creator needing a Creator is illogical.
I know that is a difficult concept to grasp for a "finite" materialistic focused mind. But once you do, you might start asking useful questions. |
That is very touching.
Can you provide some evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Religion is nothing more than a small bunch of clever people gaining control over a large bunch of dumb people. You tell them there is a power higher than human, that it is all seeing all knowing, mysterious and powerful. You then tell them that you and and only you can intercede between this god and the rest of humanity, and that only you can interpret what his words mean. Then you tell the people what god told you, about "the rules" of how to behave to get into "heaven", and voila, you have control of the population. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tjames426 wrote: |
"Tolkien had a creator, who is God's creator? "
___
Once again, people assume that your straw man <made up> definition of "God" is what the classical understanding is. It isn't.
As a Christian, I reject your implication that "the Creator" needs a creator.
I know this is hard for someone who is a materialist. But....
The Creator God does not live within the bounds of a "space linear time dimension." Thus, the idea of the Creator needing a Creator is illogical.
I know that is a difficult concept to grasp for a "finite" materialistic focused mind. But once you do, you might start asking useful questions. |
I do grasp many concepts outside the realm of materialism, I just don't accept them. The problem is when theists claim their God needs no creator yet the universe does. So useful question no1: Why does God not need a creator and yet the universe does?
no2: Why is the Christian God any truer than Allah, Odin, Ra or Zeus?
And again as a theist you have failed to explain the processes through which your god created the cosmos. "God created everything" is a scientific claim not backed up by evidence. If you don't have any that's okay just don't expect everyone else to believe you or think you may be right.
God exists outside of time. The universe exists outside of time. With out any evidence why should I consider either to be true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| Religion is nothing more than a small bunch of clever people gaining control over a large bunch of dumb people. You tell them there is a power higher than human, that it is all seeing all knowing, mysterious and powerful. You then tell them that you and and only you can intercede between this god and the rest of humanity, and that only you can interpret what his words mean. Then you tell the people what god told you, about "the rules" of how to behave to get into "heaven", and voila, you have control of the population. |
Stop Oprah! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tjames426
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do grasp many concepts outside the realm of materialism, I just don't accept them. The problem is when theists claim their God needs no creator yet the universe does.
___
You are not looking for a discussion. You said that in the above statement. So no matter of logic will do anything...
Obviously, the material Unverse is part of the created space linear time dimension. Your thinking is too small to grasp the concept of eternal. But that is just a result of a modern western materialistic education. Rather sad actually.
Once again, you do not truly understand the concept: The Creator God does not live / dwell within the bounds of a "space linear time dimension."
If you did you would not be repeating the "illogical arguement" that the Creator God needs a Creator.
Last edited by Tjames426 on Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What complete gibberish...I mean, really!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tjames426
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What is the problem...
Am I using concepts that are advanced for you?
Or are the words too big that you can't understand? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faster
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Outside the SPACE LINEAR TIME DIMENSION is a house.
It is the Flying Spaghetti Monster's house, blessed by His noodly appendage.
In the basement of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's house, you will find god: watching TV and eating Cheetos (jumbo size, from Costco). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tjames426 wrote: |
I do grasp many concepts outside the realm of materialism, I just don't accept them. The problem is when theists claim their God needs no creator yet the universe does.
___
You are not looking for a discussion. You said that in the above statement. So no matter of logic will do anything...
Obviously, the material Unverse is part of the created space linear time dimension. Your thinking is too small to grasp the concept of eternal. But that is just a result of a modern western materialistic education. Rather sad actually.
Once again, you do not truly understand the concept: The Creator God does not live / dwell within the bounds of a "space linear time dimension."
If you did you would not be repeating the "illogical arguement" that the Creator God needs a Creator. |
Yeah I'm a small minded atheist, I grasp that
Your thinking is too small too grasp Thor so look out for his hammer less he smite you. Yeah it's sad I had an education that taught me to ask questions rather than just accept what I'm told. I grasp the concept, I don't believe it because it lacks evidence! I like to have something to back up my beliefs rather than making excuses for the existence of something that isn't there.
If only my mind was as great as yours then I too could understand. Now let me restate I only ask 'Who created God?' because theists claim 'The universe needs a creator'. Why is it illogical to ask that simple question? Why can't the universe have been created outside of space time?
I think the claim god was created outside of space time again answers nothing about the universe and is purely wishful thinking aimed at avoiding an obvious question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tjames426 wrote: |
What is the problem...
Am I using concepts that are advanced for you?
Or are the words too big that you can't understand? |
Yeah break it down for use simple folk so we can understand your greatness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
