I may have picked up the humor from some high school hungarian friends in Montreal 1957-1960 just after the hungarian revolution. There were amongst them some of the most dry-witted people I have ever met.
John M wrote:
George: I enjoyed your wits, in Hungarian we call that "to chase one's brain". I am also happy that you use "sane" instead of "normal" because the "norm" is insane.Please do not cut this line (style) of yours! John Mikes --- George Levy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Bruno Marchal wrote:Le 13-août-06, à 23:48, George Levy a écrit :"I think" also implies the concept of sanity.Unless you assume thefirst step "I think" and that you are sane, youcan't take any rationaland conscious second step and have any rationaland conscious thoughtprocess. You wouldn't be able to hold any rationaldiscussion. Inherentin any computational process is the concept ofsanity. Maybe this iswhat Bruno refers to as "sane machine."All right. The point will be that all machinestrongly-believing orcommunicating or proving their own sanity willappear to be (frompurely number-theoretical reasons) insane and eveninconsistent. Notethat machines communicating that they are *insane*(instead of sane)*are* insane, but remains consistent. This should please crazy John Mikes :)This only proves that a "sane" machine cannot be sure that it thinks correctly. So the sane machine would say: "I think but, since I may be insane, I am not sure if I am." Only the insane machine would positively assert "I think therefore I am!" So we know now where Descartes belongs: in an insane asylum, so do most philosophers, religious leaders and politicians. Some mathematicians may be exempt, but only if they don't claim that Godel is right! Don't quote me! George
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list