2 ms·
Understanding "God" as a "Personal God" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_god http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_god) is by no means limited to CS circl
by DougBTX 18y ago
Understanding "God" as a "Personal God" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_god http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_god) is by no means limited to CS circles, I'd say it is the default position in much of the western world.
Beyond that, yes, you're probably right: a broader definition of god would probably lead to less people calling themselves atheist. I'm not sure how you would go about expanding the definition, it seems like any religion which says "this is what god is" will have a natural advantage over one which says "god is whatever you like", since people are better at coming together over things which they share, rather than things they agree not to share.
- robg 18y agoBut if anything, I'd expect programmers to be willing and interested in writing their own definition. The problem only comes in when one assumes that's the only definition. Still, programmers seem more, not less, amenable to re-write when something isn't right.
- randallsquared 18y agoWhy bother with redefining someone else's term for your own use? It seems more straightforward to come up with your own term, if the concept doesn't match in the first place.
- robg 18y agoThat, I think, is a fine question. The emergence of "spirituality" is seemingly one approach to get around the term. For me, I'm okay with struggling with the term because it leads to good discussions with folks of differing persuasions.
- DougBTX 18y agoWhy bother with redefining someone else's term for your own use? If you think that someone stole your term, or at least your term's historical meaning, then it's fair enough to fight to take it back. You'll have problems communicating with people who don't remember the less-common meaning until you remind them of it, but that might be a price worth paying.