On 11 Sep 2008, at 19:06, Brent Meeker wrote:

##
Advertising

>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>
>> I think we are due for yet another extension to logic, one which will
>> contain Bayesianism as a special case.
>
> But logic is also the manipulation of sequences of propositions. No
> matter how
> clever, you still need to something else to supply meaning. I think
> meaning
> only arises in relation to action within an environment.
That is a magical move, unless you put some infinities perhaps.
Selection among an infinity of environment
would explain a little more, yet it is not enough.
>
>
>>
>> I think Bruno had it right, it's all Category Theory- and make the
>> next big leap forward in logic, we need to start using the concepts
>> from Category Theory and apply them to logic, to develop a new logic
>> capable of going beyond Bayesianism and dealing with the semantics of
>> information. But how? Listen to this:
>>
>> <b>Given two categories C and D a functor F from C to D can be
>> thought
>> of as an *analogy* between C and D, because F has to map objects of C
>> to objects of D and arrows of C to arrows of D in such a way that the
>> compositional structure of the two categories is preserved.</b>
>
> No meaning there either.
Caterorial logician and algebraist would differ with you on this.
Again I don't think
it is enough, but at least category theory gives a frame for the
notion of reductive meaning,
that is, when meaning is given by a faithful embedding of some unknown
into something we
already know "meaningfully".
Bruno
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---