I think you and John touched the fundamental issues of human rational. It's 
a dilemma encountered by phenomenology. Now I have a question: In theory we 
can't distinguish ourselves from a Lobian Machine. But can lobian machines 
truly have sufficient rich experiences like human? For example, is it 
possible for a lobian machine to "still its mind' or "cease the computational 
logic" like some eastern philosophy suggested? Maybe any of the out-of-loop 
experience is still part of the computation/logic, just as our out-of-body 
experiences are actually the trick of brain chemicals? 

--- On Thu, 11/20/08, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MGA 1
Date: Thursday, November 20, 2008, 12:05 PM

Hi John,

> It boils down to my overall somewhat negative position (although
> I have no better one) of UDA, MPG, comp, etc. - all of them are
> products of HUMAN thinking and restrictions as WE can imagine
> the unfathomable existence (the totality - real TOE).
> I find it a 'cousin' of the reductionistic conventional sciences,
> a bit 'freed up'. Maybe a distant cousin. Meaning: it handles the
> totality WITHIN the framework of our limited (human) logic(s).

I think that Human logic is already a progress compared to Russian, or  
Belgian, or Hungarian, or American logic, or ...

And then  you know how much I agree with you, once you substitute  
"human" by "lobian" (where a lobian machine/number is a
machine who know she is universal, and bet she is a machine).

> Alas, we cannot do better.

I'm afraid so. Thanks for acknowledging.

>  just want to take all this mental
> exercise with the grain of salt of "there may be more to all of

Sure. And if we take ourself too much seriously, we can miss the  
ultimate cosmic divine joke (if there is one).

> what we cannot even fancy (imagine, fantasize of) today,
> with our mind anchored in our restrictions. (Including 'digital',
> 'numbers', learned wisdom, etc.).

Be careful and be open to your own philosophy. The idea that
and "numbers" (the concept, not our human description of it) are  
restrictions could be due to our human prejudice. May be a machine  
could one day believes this is a form of unfounded prejudicial  

I hope you don't mind my frank attitude, and I wish you the best,


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

Reply via email to