I think Hegel classified what you are describing as "illusory being"... but don't go reading the wikipedia on it. There is a real hegelian there that turned it into a pile of pompous bullcrap (find several revisions back when I described it, making halfway sense... impossible though ever to really understand Hegel).
On 8/8/13, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: >> It seems obvious that if the bases for all >> higher thought are themselves relativistic then the foundations of >> thought will be permeated with flaws and won't be able to withstand >> much building. I think it is a misinterpretation to say that thought >> requires a ground of sensory input and the evidence for this is that >> the grounding issue has been widely known since the 1980s and yet >> progress in AGI has been slower than Moore's Law (in my opinion) since >> then. The structure of thought has to be fluid, but it has to be a >> slow fluid. My conjecture is that almost all reasoning, even >> something that has been habituated, requires some imagination. >> Jim Bromer > > Perhaps the imagination has to be used to check the structure of an > extension of an idea (even in the more mundane cases) to make sure > that there is nothing in the new extension that would make the > structure unstable. > Jim Bromer > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
