basically you guys don't know what your talking about, especially Bruno with his dream-seed "theology".... but the main purpose this group and these thinkers serve, is to awaken us from our dogmatic slumber.... the thinking of this group is exceptionally skilled at that.... it is a perpetual reawakening from your dogmatic slumber.

## Advertising

On Jul 1, 12:32 am, B Soroud <bsor...@gmail.com> wrote: > indeed it is... I am saying that most everythign according to us is an > anthropomorphization... we, and by extensasicaion, most everything, by virtue > of > us, is an anthropomorphization... > > but more importantly I want to say: so you believe that these universal > numbers have an existence in and of themselves and are being apprehended... > not necessarily appreheneded or ascertained as such, nor in theory.... but > are you asserting that beings in themselves in the abstract and theological > sense are being reflected to your thought in shadow form? > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > > On 01 Jul 2011, at 08:36, Constantine Pseudonymous wrote: > > > is not any meta-phenomenological 'object', including the 'self', > >> necessarily the construct of a third-person point of view... > > > There is the 3-self. That is what you bet being your body, or what you need > > to remain alive/conscious. > > Then there is the 1-self, you as conscious person. The mind body problem is > > the problem of relating those two things. It is not yet solved, but I think > > some progress have perhaps been done. > > > an > >> essentially anthropomorphic third-person perception without any > >> objective independent existence, or any determination as such..... and > >> is not the negation of such an assertion assumed to be so and > >> predicated on your human-being-ness and indirection... therefore > >> proving the fact that "man is the measure of all things", > > > IF we are machine, then the universal numbers (in the sense of theoretical > > computer science) are better candidate for being the measure of all things. > > They create the coupling consciousness/realties. > > It is an open question if they dreams/computations glue sufficiently well > > to define physical realities. > > > and all > >> things are relative to himself and have the status of third-person > >> entities and nothing more except as projected by man. > > > Why "by man"? Is that not an anthropomorphism? > > > Bruno > > >> On Jun 4, 1:09 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > >>> On 04 Jun 2011, at 19:06, Rex Allen wrote: > > >>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>> One thing I thought of recently which is a good way of showing how > >>>>> computation occurs due to the objective truth or falsehood of > >>>>> mathematical > >>>>> propositions is as follows: > > >>> Most would agree that a statement such as "8 is composite" has an > >>>>> eternal > >>>>> objective truth. > > >>> Assuming certain of axioms and rules of inference, sure. > > >>> But everyone agree on the axioms of arithmetic. And we could take any > >>> universal (in the Turing sense) system instead. The physical laws > >>> cannot depend on the choice of the "universal base". Lat us continue > >>> with (N, +, *), because it is taught in high school. > > >>> But isn't that true of nearly anything? How many axiomatic systems > >>>> are there? > > >>> Likewise the statement: the Nth fibbinacci number is X. > >>>>> Has an objective truth for any integer N no matter how large. > >>>>> Let's say > >>>>> N=10 and X = 55. The truth of this depends on the recursive > >>>>> definition of > >>>>> the fibbinacci sequence, where future states depend on prior > >>>>> states, and is > >>>>> therefore a kind if computation. Since N may be infinitely large, > >>>>> then in a > >>>>> sense this mathematical computation proceeds forever. Likewise one > >>>>> might > >>>>> say that chaitin's constant = Y has some objective mathematical > >>>>> truth. For > >>>>> chaintons constant to have an objective value, the execution of all > >>>>> programs > >>>>> must occur. > > >>> Simple recursive relations can lead to exraordinary complexity, > >>>>> consider the > >>>>> universe of the Mandelbrot set implied by the simple relation Z(n > >>>>> +1)= Z(n)^2 > >>>>> + C. Other recursive formulae may result in the evolution of > >>>>> structures > >>>>> such as our universe or the computation of your mind. > > >>> Is extraordinary complexity required for the manifestation of "mind"? > >>>> If so, why? > > >>> Is it that these recursive relations cause our experience, or are just > >>>> a way of thinking about our experience? > > >>> Is it: > > >>> Recursive relations cause thought. > > >>> OR: > > >>> Recursion is just a label that we apply to some of our implicational > >>>> beliefs. > > >>> I think you are confusing computability, which is absolute (assuming > >>> Church thesis), and provability, which is always relative to theories, > >>> machines, entities, etc. > > >>> Jason is right, computation occurs in "arithmetical platonia", even in > >>> a tiny part of it actually, independently of us. This tiny part is > >>> assumed in the rest of science, and comp makes it necessarily enough > >>> (by taking seriously the first and third person distinction). > > >>> Bruno > > >>> The latter seems more plausible to me. > > >>> Rex > > >>> -- > > >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >>>> Groups "Everything List" group. > >>>> To post to this group, send email to > >>>> everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com> > >>>> . > >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >>>> everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > >>>> . > >>>> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/** > >>>> group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en> > >>>> . > > >>>http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/<http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/> > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "Everything List" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to > >> everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com> > >> . > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/** > >> group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en> > >> . > > >http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/<http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/> > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Everything List" group. > > To post to this group, send email to > > everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com> > > . > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe@ > > **googlegroups.com <everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/** > > group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en> > > . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.