82,976
edits
Discourse on Intercourse: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
His logic was this: all-hands conference calls must exist, since no-one in her right mind would make the idea up if she didn’t have to. So, since someone ''has'' made them up, [[conference call]]s must be a necessary fact of corporate life. | His logic was this: all-hands conference calls must exist, since no-one in her right mind would make the idea up if she didn’t have to. So, since someone ''has'' made them up, [[conference call]]s must be a necessary fact of corporate life. | ||
On that predicate, it follows that as it is an ''[[a priori]]'' fact that a [[conference call]] must comprise more than one person (“a man cannot meet alone”, he quipped), to give effect to conference calls, the most basic irreducible ontology of the universe must contain ''multiple'' individuals. At least three, thought [[Büchstein]]: the “meetor” (which he regarded as an analog of Descartes “thinking thing”, or “[[res cogitans]]”), one “meetee” (which [[Büchstein]] characterised primarily as a talking thing (“[[res verbositans]]”) and, since transparently neither of these would willingly meet without some kind of compulsion, a third person (usually a [[management consultant]] or [[project manager]]) to force the meeting to happen and assign actions and timelines at its conclusion (an “action-assigning thing” or “[[res bossitans]]”). | On that predicate, it follows that as it is an ''[[a priori]]'' fact that a [[conference call]] must comprise more than one person (“a man cannot meet alone”, he quipped), to give effect to conference calls, the most basic irreducible ontology of the universe must contain ''multiple'' individuals. At least three, thought [[Büchstein]]: the “meetor” (which he regarded as an analog of Descartes “thinking thing”, or “[[res cogitans]]”), one “meetee” (which [[Büchstein]] characterised primarily as a talking thing (“[[res verbositans]]”) and, since transparently neither of these would willingly meet without some kind of compulsion, a third person (usually a [[management consultant]] or [[project manager]]) to force the meeting to happen and assign actions and timelines at its conclusion (an “action-assigning thing” or “[[res bossitans]]”). In any case, since they were all engaged on a [[conference call]], none of them needed to be God. | ||
“God is omniscient,” he said. “God doesn’t ''do'' [[conference calls]].What would be the point?” | |||
Rather than simply rebutting [[Descartes]]’ proof that there ''must'' be a God, by illustrating one was not necessary, [[Büchstein]] went further: “a universe in which [[conference call]]s necessarily exist,” he contended, “is logically inconsistent with the continued presence of an omniscient, benign, omnipotent deity”. He took this as an ''[[a priori]]'' proof of the ''non''-existence of God. | |||
{{linkedin|04/09/19}} | {{linkedin|04/09/19}} | ||