[Please ignore if not interested] Hi Anil
Thanks for your comments. Just one, perhaps most important, clarification for now: I was/am not denying the existence of metaphysics. If anything, I sometimes think of my work as an instance of "computational phenomenology". Thanks and best Ada On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 1:00 PM Anil Singh via Corpora < [email protected]> wrote: > [Please ignore it if you are not interested.] > > I have thought several times before writing this email and I apologise if > someone finds it irrelevant and irritating. I just want to express *my > personal opinion*, nothing more than that. I am not making any claims about > anything. I have decided to write this mail as I have been on this list in > some way since 2007 and have participated in some of the rare discussions > that have taken place here. > > On Ada's comments: > > - I have been trying to understand what her findings are and what > implications they have. So far, I have not been able to understand how > these findings can prove the non-existence of words or sentences or > (p)-language. As far as I know, you can't prove the negative of anything, > particularly by empirical research. In any case, modern Physics tells us > that almost everything is just metaphysics and at the bottom there are > only fields, nothing else. Even so, as someone said, Newtonian Physics is > still extremely relevant for most of our daily purposes and it is totally > unnecessary to think in terms of relativity or quantum mechanics in daily > life most of the time, that is, even in scientific and engineering works. > > - Also, as someone pointed out, even characters are not clearly defined. I > would go further and say that a byte is also an arbitrary unit, having to > do with the way our computers work and the history of their development. > Perhaps then we should only talk of bits, because they are the only > real units? Ada is --- in my opinion (which may be wrong) --- looking at > the issues from a purely, I could say purist, Information Theoretical way, > where information is in the Shannon sense and has no meaning and is > emphatically defined as having no meaning. Well, in that sense, life is > just a random increase in entropy, nothing else, but that is neither here > nor there for practical purposes. There may be some philosophical or > spiritual relevance of this, but in actual life it is almost always a non > sequitur. (Please note again that this is simply my personal opinion). > > - What her claims --- as contrasted to her findings --- basically mean is > that she is basically denying the existence of metaphysics. In my opinion, > humans live and breathe metaphysics and they live and die with it. It > doesn't really matter if it "doesn't exist", whatever that can mean. We > might as well deny the existence of species or of colours or of > [__FILL_IN_THE_BLANKS__]. > > - About words, as pointed out in this thread, almost every linguist and > even most of the experienced NLP practitioners know about the problems with > the concept of 'word'. The same with the concept of 'sentence'. As for the > concept of 'language', every book on sociolinguistics explains why the > concept of (p)-language is unscientific. That is why the term 'variety' is > preferred in sociolinguistics. I have been teaching this fact to students > *in CL/NLP courses* for years without fail. > > - Finally, in case she really is right (although I don't think so till > now), well, then there is a need to be patient with the world. As I am sure > she knows, paradigm shifts even in the world of science and technology take > time to happen. > > - I don't have anything more to say about this matter. I will try not to > send any more mails on this thread. > > > About matters related to the use of this list: > > - My opinion of this matter may be biased due to the fact that I use a > different email id for most mailing lists, including this one, so perhaps I > have much less reason to be irritated with unnecessary emails. > > - Having said that, I find this list to be lifeless or inert for the very > long durations since 2007 when there is no discussion or argument going on. > Most of the announcements I get on this email id are irrelevant for me, but > I can simply ignore them as I use a different email id here. Still, > sometimes the discussions can become stressful in some sense. > > - The discussions on this list are --- for me --- mostly interesting > breaks from the commodified world of science and technology, as of > everything else now. > > - I have never understood why people get irritated in today's world by a > few and far between emails which may be irrelevant for them. Almost > everyone is on one or --- usually --- more social media, where there is a > deluge of such messages and posts and whatnot. BTW, I have never been on > any social media, except having a personal blog for some years. This is one > of the rare forums where I have participated. And again, BTW, I do regret > some of the rash mail I had sent on this and other lists, mostly when I was > doing PhD. > > - I personally think that people, including Ada, can be more tolerant. > > - As for *mails should not be advertisement*, I am puzzled by this. > Seriously? In today's commodified science and technology, where you *have > to advertise* as part of your work. You are supposed to advertise, even > offensively. I think everyone will understand what I mean. If researchers, > on a research forum, do not talk about their own research, what do you > expect them to talk about? I think "advertising" one's research work here > is more democratic than advertising in other formal or official forums. > Researchers --- at least most of them --- don't earn anything from their > research, apart from their salary. They publish papers, from which other > people make a lot of money, but they don't get anything. They, in many > places, don't even get to read a lot of the research papers by others for > free, which they simply *need to read* for their same work! > > - And then there is social media. People like me, who are not on any > social media, have no other forum to express their opinion. Why can't we > simply ignore some *thread* if we don't like the discussion going on there, > just as we ignore most of the announcement emails? > > To sum up, I think we can all be more tolerant, perhaps including myself. > > _______________________________________________ > Corpora mailing list -- [email protected] > https://list.elra.info/mailman3/postorius/lists/corpora.list.elra.info/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Corpora mailing list -- [email protected] https://list.elra.info/mailman3/postorius/lists/corpora.list.elra.info/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
