Kurt Gödel, famous Mathematician, was a Certain Confessed Theist

Posted in the Atheism Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
humor

Issaquah, WA

#1 Jan 29, 2010
http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/tabid/68/id...

"God and Gödel

As his correspondence with Burke D. Grandjean attests, Gödel was a self-confessed theist, going as far as developing an ontological argument in an attempt to prove the existence of God. He chose the framework of modal logic, a useful formal language for proof theory, which also has important applications in computer science (Blackburn, de Rijke & Venema, 2001). This logic is the study of the deductive behavior of the expressions ‘it is necessary that’ and ‘it is possible that,’ which arise frequently in ordinary (philosophical) language. However, according to his biographer John Dawson, he never published his ontological argument for fear of ridicule by his peers.

"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_G%C3%B6del#...

"
Gödel was a convinced theist. He rejected the notion that God was impersonal. He believed firmly in an afterlife, stating:“I am convinced of the afterlife, independent of theology. If the world is rationally constructed, there must be an afterlife."[16] He said about Islam:“I like Islam: it is a consistent [or consequential] idea of religion and open-minded."[17]"
humor

Issaquah, WA

#2 Jan 29, 2010
Gödel is an impressive mathematician, logician, and philosopher.

And I must say, he has impacted the fields of mathematics and science with his contributions to those subjects.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/fe...

It is sometimes interesting to read about some of these Scientists and Mathematicians who for whatever reason are Theists....

“Invisible Pink Unicorn”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#3 Jan 30, 2010
From the link you posted.

In 1933 Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany and over the following years the Nazis rose in influence in Austria, and among Vienna's mathematicians. In June 1936, Moritz Schlick, whose seminar had aroused Gödel's interest in logic, was assassinated by a pro-Nazi student. This triggered "a severe nervous crisis" in Gödel. He developed paranoid symptoms, including a fear of being poisoned, and spent several months in a sanatorium for nervous diseases.

Gödel suffered periods of mental instability and illness. He had an obsessive fear of being poisoned; he wouldn't eat unless his wife, Adele, tasted his food for him. Late in 1977, Adele was hospitalized for six months and could not taste Gödel's food anymore. In her absence, he refused to eat, eventually starving himself to death.[13] He weighed 65 pounds (approximately 30 kg) when he died. His death certificate reported that he died of "malnutrition and inanition caused by personality disturbance" in Princeton Hospital on January 14, 1978
humor

Seattle, WA

#4 Jan 31, 2010
Jammercolo wrote:
From the link you posted.
In 1933 Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany and over the following years the Nazis rose in influence in Austria, and among Vienna's mathematicians. In June 1936, Moritz Schlick, whose seminar had aroused Gödel's interest in logic, was assassinated by a pro-Nazi student. This triggered "a severe nervous crisis" in Gödel. He developed paranoid symptoms, including a fear of being poisoned, and spent several months in a sanatorium for nervous diseases.
Gödel suffered periods of mental instability and illness. He had an obsessive fear of being poisoned; he wouldn't eat unless his wife, Adele, tasted his food for him. Late in 1977, Adele was hospitalized for six months and could not taste Gödel's food anymore. In her absence, he refused to eat, eventually starving himself to death.[13] He weighed 65 pounds (approximately 30 kg) when he died. His death certificate reported that he died of "malnutrition and inanition caused by personality disturbance" in Princeton Hospital on January 14, 1978
His suffering from the trauma of assassination on an idol of his does NOT take away from the genius that he was.

In addition, his belief in a God or Deity does NOT Take away from the genius that he was.

You have no point attacking Godel's trauma-induced paranoia so as the diminish his contribution to Logic, Mathematics.

For the record, The reason I created this Thread was because some atheist BobtheFaith or Itaint..etc told me to present a Scientist who was a Theist as well..so I brought forth Godel and there are more.

The point I'm making is that their "Theist" background doesn't takeaway from their scientific/logical/mathematica l discoveries and contribution to Humanity!

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#5 Jan 31, 2010
humor wrote:
http://www.metanexus.net/magaz ine/tabid/68/id/9796/Default.a spx
"God and Gödel
As his correspondence with Burke D. Grandjean attests, Gödel was a self-confessed theist, going as far as developing an ontological argument in an attempt to prove the existence of God. He chose the framework of modal logic, a useful formal language for proof theory, which also has important applications in computer science (Blackburn, de Rijke & Venema, 2001). This logic is the study of the deductive behavior of the expressions ‘it is necessary that’ and ‘it is possible that,’ which arise frequently in ordinary (philosophical) language. However, according to his biographer John Dawson, he never published his ontological argument for fear of ridicule by his peers.
"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_G%C3%B6del#...
"
Gödel was a convinced theist. He rejected the notion that God was impersonal. He believed firmly in an afterlife, stating:“I am convinced of the afterlife, independent of theology. If the world is rationally constructed, there must be an afterlife."[16] He said about Islam:“I like Islam: it is a consistent [or consequential] idea of religion and open-minded."[17]"
So, why tell us? Is there a point?
humor

Seattle, WA

#6 Jan 31, 2010
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>So, why tell us? Is there a point?
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#7 Jan 31, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
His suffering from the trauma of assassination on an idol of his does NOT take away from the genius that he was.
In addition, his belief in a God or Deity does NOT Take away from the genius that he was.
You have no point attacking Godel's trauma-induced paranoia so as the diminish his contribution to Logic, Mathematics.
For the record, The reason I created this Thread was because some atheist BobtheFaith or Itaint..etc told me to present a Scientist who was a Theist as well..so I brought forth Godel and there are more.
The point I'm making is that their "Theist" background doesn't takeaway from their scientific/logical/mathematica l discoveries and contribution to Humanity!
Are you prepared to take the same stance on atheist scientists?
humor

Seattle, WA

#8 Jan 31, 2010
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you prepared to take the same stance on atheist scientists?
I already did.

I've said it plenty of times here.

I personally know atheist and theist scientists who argue back and forth but at the end of the day, they are all still scientists who hold a worldview NOT reached at through the scientific method.

However, a person like Dawkins should know better to divide his atheist worldview and the scientific worldview, otherwise he can be and will be shown as a Atheist promoter and not even a scientist!

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#9 Jan 31, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
I already did.
I've said it plenty of times here.
I personally know atheist and theist scientists who argue back and forth but at the end of the day, they are all still scientists who hold a worldview NOT reached at through the scientific method.
However, a person like Dawkins should know better to divide his atheist worldview and the scientific worldview, otherwise he can be and will be shown as a Atheist promoter and not even a scientist!
Why do you have such a problem with this? It certainly should be no sweat off your back. And BTW, Dawkins' credentials speak for themselves. Whether you like it or not he IS a scientist.
"From 1967 to 1969, Dawkins was an assistant professor of zoology at the University of California, Berkeley. During this period, the students and faculty at UC Berkeley were largely opposed to the ongoing Vietnam War, and he became heavily involved in the anti-war demonstrations and activities. He returned to the University of Oxford in 1970 as a lecturer in zoology, and in 1990 was appointed a Reader.[6][7]
In 1995, Dawkins was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, a position that had been endowed by Charles Simonyi with the express intention that the holder "be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field". Since 1970, he has been a fellow of New College, Oxford. In September 2008, he retired from Oxford.[8]
Dawkins has been referred to in the media as "Darwin's Rottweiler", by analogy with English biologist T. H. Huxley, who was known as "Darwin's Bulldog" for his advocacy of Charles Darwin's evolutionary ideas.[9][10][11] During a mid-2008 BBC video on the science advice he might give to a U.S. President, Dawkins suggested
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#10 Jan 31, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
I already did.
I've said it plenty of times here.
I personally know atheist and theist scientists who argue back and forth but at the end of the day, they are all still scientists who hold a worldview NOT reached at through the scientific method.
However, a person like Dawkins should know better to divide his atheist worldview and the scientific worldview, otherwise he can be and will be shown as a Atheist promoter and not even a scientist!
Why can't he be an atheist promoter? He retired from Oxford in 2008, he can do whatever he likes. We understand this galls the crap out of YOU, but why continue to beat this dead horse?
humor

Seattle, WA

#11 Jan 31, 2010
He can be an Atheist promoter..just he shouldn't use a Science platform such as Professorship or Reader or his position at the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, to do so.

The Public is more diverse than the Science field..so to approach the public the way Dawkins had done so does a disservice to the Public Understanding of Science..infact it probably made them even more irate and now we have this Creationism floating around.

Science was separated from the CHurch (Financially 100s of years ago) and now it is trying to free itself of social control which in all honesty is difficult.

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#12 Jan 31, 2010
humor wrote:
He can be an Atheist promoter..just he shouldn't use a Science platform such as Professorship or Reader or his position at the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, to do so.
The Public is more diverse than the Science field..so to approach the public the way Dawkins had done so does a disservice to the Public Understanding of Science..infact it probably made them even more irate and now we have this Creationism floating around.
Science was separated from the CHurch (Financially 100s of years ago) and now it is trying to free itself of social control which in all honesty is difficult.
Just who do you think pointed out the creationists lies? How dare that Dawkins argue with creationists!

You appear to be the only "scientist" that has a problem with atheists.
trollbuster

Knoxville, TN

#13 Jan 31, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
His suffering from the trauma of assassination on an idol of his does NOT take away from the genius that he was.
In addition, his belief in a God or Deity does NOT Take away from the genius that he was.
You have no point attacking Godel's trauma-induced paranoia so as the diminish his contribution to Logic, Mathematics.
For the record, The reason I created this Thread was because some atheist BobtheFaith or Itaint..etc told me to present a Scientist who was a Theist as well..so I brought forth Godel and there are more.
The point I'm making is that their "Theist" background doesn't takeaway from their scientific/logical/mathematica l discoveries and contribution to Humanity!
Actually the challenge was to find a scientist who had published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal who was a Bible-literalist. You reinterpreted the challenge to make it easier. That's okay--it's still useful in its own way, but it doesn't meet the criteria of the original challenge.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#14 Feb 1, 2010
humor wrote:
He can be an Atheist promoter..just he shouldn't use a Science platform such as Professorship or Reader or his position at the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, to do so.
Why not?

Behe and others use THEIR "sciency" platform to promote their Creationism.

I don't here you write SCATHING criticisms of THESE guys?

Hypocrite, much?
humor

Seattle, WA

#15 Feb 1, 2010
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not?
Behe and others use THEIR "sciency" platform to promote their Creationism.
I don't here you write SCATHING criticisms of THESE guys?
Hypocrite, much?
I don't see you writing your "SCATHING" criticism of those guys either!

Go ahead do so..I'll follow along!

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#16 Feb 1, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see you writing your "SCATHING" criticism of those guys either!
Go ahead do so..I'll follow along!
Don't have to, Dawkins pretty much takes care of that.
humor

Seattle, WA

#17 Feb 1, 2010
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't have to, Dawkins pretty much takes care of that.
Don't have to, madscot/BobtheFaith/every atheist pretty much takes care of that.

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#18 Feb 1, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't have to, madscot/BobtheFaith/every atheist pretty much takes care of that.
Indeed. We dislike creationists just as much as you.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#19 Feb 1, 2010
humor wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see you writing your "SCATHING" criticism of those guys either!
You're new here-- so I'll cut you some slack for being too lazy to dig into the earlier posts of mine.

But, I tend to bring up the dirty laundry on the nut-job religion,'creationism' whenever you Believer-types try to use it as an "argument".
humor wrote:
Go ahead do so..I'll follow along!
I......doubt you are able.

The counter-arguments against creationists....uses logic, you see....

Something you've demonstrated you do not have much of.
bobsalot

Reading, UK

#20 Feb 22, 2013
Wow, people believe just because they have an 'Athiest' banner to hide behind and use fancy words like logic, they can be as stupid as they want without giving fellow humans a shread of respect!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr Joe fortuna 232,915
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 2 hr Eagle 12 2,289
Is 'naturalism' a bleak philosophical outlook? ... 8 hr Mikko 2
Yes, atheists can be fundamentalists 8 hr Mikko 2
Christians More Supportive of Torture Than Non-... 9 hr Thinking 3
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 15 hr _Bad Company 143
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) Sat polymath257 23,199
More from around the web