Hi Bruno Marchal The 2p appears to be in synthetic logic such as in epistemology (phenomenology or perception) and presumably in Boolean synthetic logic operations such as AND, OR, XOR and NAND operations, where apparently some form of combination is used ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic_synthesis "History of logic synthesis The roots of logic synthesis can be traced to the treatment of logic by George Boole (1815 to 1864), in what is now termed Boolean algebra. In 1938, Claude Shannon showed that the two-valued Boolean algebra can describe the operation of switching circuits. In the early days, logic design involved manipulating the truth table representations as Karnaugh maps. The Karnaugh map-based minimization of logic is guided by a set of rules on how entries in the maps can be combined. A human designer can typically only work with Karnaugh maps containing up to four to six variables. Logic operations usually consist of boolean AND, OR, XOR and NAND operations, and are the most basic forms of operations in an electronic circuit. Arithmetic operations are usually implemented with the use of logic operators. Circuits such as a binary multiplier or a binary adder are examples of more complex binary operations that can be implemented using basic logic operators. " This shows how 2p is used in perception: http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/newlist/nl-frame.htm The Categories as used in perception: I 1p--Quality (Reference to a Ground), II 2p-- Relation (Reference to a Correlate), II 3p--Representation (Reference to an Interpretant), I 1p-- Quale (that which refers to a ground), II 2p--Relate (that which refers to a ground and correlate, ) III 3p--Representamen (that which refers to ground, correlate, and interpretant. ) [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/29/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-28, 14:48:04 Subject: Re: On the truth of comp -->Fw: 1p= pragmatic or experiential truthvs3p = truth by calculation Hi Roger, On 28 Dec 2012, at 13:53, Roger Clough wrote: Thanks for the clarification, I was wrong about 3p. But according to Leibniz, 1p is always in God's eye, but our personal pov is never undistorted or perfectly clear, and operates down here, which is why I classified it as being contingent. 3p have necessities and contingencies, but they have also their divine and terrestrial aspect. Here, Divine just means True, and Terrestrial just means effectively believed (and true as I study ideally correct machines). So there is an OUTER GOD, which is the ONE, and which is 3p, in the comp theory, as it is the collection of true arithmetical propositions. There is a knower, and it is the INNER GOD, it is the one "available" in the mystical experience. For the ideally correct machine it is both terrestrial and divine (S4Grz = S4Grz*). The No?, i.e. the "accessible" 3p, and the Matter splits into divine and terrestrial parts. Eventually we get 8 person points of view, which gives 8 ways to see arithmetical truth from inside: TRUTH (outer God) 0p INTELLIGIBLE (by Man) INTELLIGIBLE (by God) 3p SOUL (inner God) 1p Intelligible MATTER (by Man) Intelligible MATTER (by God) 3p sensible MATTER (by Man) sensible MATTER (by God) 1p This sum up an interpretation of Plotinus in term of the naturally existing intensional variant of self-reference. This gives eight different logics/mathematics. if G del's incompleteness theorem was false, or if Church thesis was false, the 8 hypostases would collapse into effective truth. But things are not that easy for the machine looking inward. I have no 2p, as I am not studying the private life of couples of machines :) Bruno [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/28/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-27, 06:09:25 Subject: Re: On the truth of comp -->Fw: 1p= pragmatic or experiential truth vs3p = truth by calculation On 26 Dec 2012, at 17:33, Roger Clough wrote: Note that 1p = contingent truth Not at all. Each person pov has its own set of necessities and contingencies. 3p = necessary truth Not correct (in comp, and weakening of comp). There are many pure 3p arithmetical contingencies. This is highly counter-intuitive and is a consequence of G?el's incompleteness, mainly. More on this later (perhaps on FOAR). So the question of whether comp is true or not is whether or when or where 1p = 3p In God's eye, and nowhere else. In the computationalist theory. Bruno ----- Have received the following content ----- Sender: Roger Clough Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-26, 11:26:27 Subject: 1p= pragmatic or experiential truth vs 3p = truth by calculation Hi everything-list IMHO that comp iis true or not is equalvalent to the question does 1p = 3p ? where 1p= truth by experience (or actuality) and 3p = truth by description (by theory) [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/26/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
