the Plotinus paper is the first one on your list of publications on
On Aug 18, 10:46 am, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:14, ronaldheld wrote:
> > I have heard of Octonians but have not used them.
> > I do not know anything about intelligible hypostases
> Have you heard about Gödel's provability (beweisbar) predicate bew(x)?
> If you have, define con(x) by ~bew ('~x') (carefully taking into
> account the Gödel numbering). Con is for contingent, or consistent.
> Then the logic of the intelligible matter hypostases are given by the
> predicate Bew(x) & Con(x)
> (The sensible, non intelligible, hypostases, cannot be defined by a
> predicate, and some detour in Modal logic is necessary, but for each
> arithmetical propositions p, you can define them by Bp & Dp & p. (Dp
> is ~B ~p, Bp is bew('p'))
> Note that Bp & Dp & p is "obviously" equivalent to p, for any correct
> machine, but no correct machine can see that equivalence, and this is
> a consequence of incompleteness).
> You can read my Plotinus paper for more, if interested.
> You can also read Plotinus II, 4: "On Matter". Plotinus took Aristotle
> not quite Platonist theory of matter, and recasted it in
> "his" (neo)Platonist doctrine.
> Basically, matter, for Aristotle---Plotinus is what is indeterminate.
> If fits well with comp where matter is the indeterminate computations
> which exist below the comp substitution level (by step 7).
> I have not really the time to say much more for now, and this is in
> AUDA, and it is better to get UDA straight before. I think.
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
For more options, visit this group at