On 2/16/2012 3:53 PM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
Are you talking about tautology?
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Stephen P. King
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2/16/2012 2:15 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
[SPK] All of this substitution stuff is predicated upon
the possibility that the brain can be emulated by a Universal
Turing Machine. It would be helpful if we first established
that a Turing Machine is capable of what we are assuming it
do be able to do. I am pretty well convinced that it cannot
Well at least, you state now that you think comp is simply
false... so it's just trolling about it, when you just reject the
premices...
Is there a difference between a statement being true given
some context and the same sentence being true in no context
whatsoever?
Hi Brian,
Welcome to the party. Please don't top post. It screws up the
formatting. To answer your question: Sort of, but consider how one
tautological statement is different from another. Have you seen my
question about the law of Identity not giving any meaning to its ... (I
can't think of the appropriate word), as in "A is A, but that the
<expletive deleted> is A?" This goes to the question of how is meaning
derived or how does meaning emerge, or what is "meaningfulness"?
Onward!
Stephen
--
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.
