On 8/14/2012 10:45 AM, Roger wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Leibniz' best possible world is a conjecture
based on L's two worlds of logic:
1) There is logic that is either always true or false, called the logic of reason or necessity.
One could call this "theory"
2) The logic of contingency, also called the logic of "fact", experimental result, or praxis, which can be true or false -- depending on the perfection of the entity
    or the time of occurrence. "actuality"
Most people who acccuse God of injustice or unfairness by a supposedly loving God confuse theory with actuality. Earthquakes do occur because the world has imperfections
or  cracks ior the cointinental plaes don't fit perfectly together.
And any fact must be that way for a reason, the reason also may be contingent, etc.
up the line.

 Dear Roger,

The "best possible world" that we have is only the one that is mutually consistent for the collections of mutually interacting (and thus communicating) observers (which we are a member of). All other features and valuations are not any kind of optimum other than the result of our collective choices. This is how free will is compatible with a deterministic physical universe.

Roger , rclo...@verizon.net <mailto:rclo...@verizon.net>
8/14/2012

    ----- Receiving the following content -----
    *From:* Stephen P. King <mailto:stephe...@charter.net>
    *Receiver:* everything-list <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>
    *Time:* 2012-08-12, 14:05:46
    *Subject:* Re: pre-established harmony

    Hi Roger,

        I will interleave some remarks.

    On 8/11/2012 7:37 AM, Roger wrote:
    Hi Stephen P. King
    As I understand it, Leibniz's pre-established harmony is analogous to
    a musical score with God, or at least some super-intelligence, as
    composer/conductor.

        Allow me to use the analogy a bit more but carefully to not go
    too far. This "musical score", does it require work of some kind
    to be created itself?

    This prevents all physical particles from colliding, instead they
    all move harmoniously together*. The score was composed before the
    Big Bang-- my own explanation is like Mozart God or that intelligence
    could hear the whole (symphony) beforehand in his head.

        I argue that the Pre-Established Harmony (PEH) requires
    solving anNP-Complete computational problem
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NP-complete_problems> that
    has an infinite number of variables. Additionally, it is not
    possible to maximize or optimize more than one variable in a
    multivariate system
    
<http://www.wellesley.edu/Economics/weerapana/econ300/econ300pdf/lecture%20300-08.pdf>.
    Unless we are going to grant God the ability to contradict
    mathematical facts, which, I argue, is equivalent to granting
    violations of the basis rules of non-contradiction, then God would
    have to run an eternal computation prior to the creation of the
    Universe. This is absurd! How can the existence of something have
    a beginning if it requires an an infinite problem to be solved first?
        Here is the problem: Computations require resources to run,
    and if resources are not available then there is no way to claim
    access to the information that would be in the solution that the
    computation would generate. WE might try to get around this
    problem the way that Bruno does by stipulating that the "truth" of
    the solution gives it existence, but the fact that some
    mathematical statement or sigma_1 sentence is true (in the prior
    sense) does not allow it to be considered as accessible for use
    for other things. For example, we could make valid claims about
    the content of a meteor that no one has examined but we cannot
    have any certainty about those claims unless we actually crack
    open the rock and physically examine its contents.
        The state of the universe as "moving harmoniously together"
    was not exactly what the PEH was for Leibniz. It was the
    synchronization of the simple actions of the Monads. It was a
    coordination of the percepts that make up the monads such that,
    for example, my monadic percept of living in a world that you also
    live in is synchronized with your monadic view of living in a
    world that I also live in such that we can be said to have this
    email chat. Remember, Monads (as defined in the Monadology) have
    no windows and cannot be considered to either "exchange"
    substances nor are embedded in a common medium that can exchange
    excitations. The entire "common world of appearances" emerges from
    and could be said to supervene upon the synchronization of
    internal (1p subjective) Monadic actions.

        I argue that the only way that God could find a solution to
    the NP-Complete problem is to make the creation of the universe
    simulataneous with the computations so that the universe itself is
    the computer that is finding the solution. This idea is discussed
    by several people including David Deutsch, Lee Smolin, Roger
    Penrose and Stuart Kaufman in their books. This implies that God's
    creative act is not a singular event but an eternal process.

    I suppose that this accords with Leibniz's belief that God,
    whoc is good, constructed the best possible world where
    as a miniomum, that least physics is obeyed.

        Yes.

      Hence
    Voltaire's  foolish criticism of Leibniz in Candide that how
    could  the volcanic or earthquake disaster in Lisbon be
    part of the most perfect world ?

        Voltair was a poor fool that could not understand the simple
    idea that only one variable can be maximized. Perhaps he was not a
    fool and knew the facts but wanted to discredit Leibniz's superior
    ideas.

    Thus, because physics must be obeyed, sometimes crap happens.

        Indeed. One might even argue that the existence of evil in the
    world is a consequence of choice; that only in a world completely
    devoid of choice might it be possible for crap to never occur. But
    this can be shown to have a vanishingly small probability or even
    zero chance of actually occurring, as 1) the NP-Complete problem
    would have to first be solved and 2) there would have to be a very
    happy "accident" where no one ever happen to be doing the actions
    which would lead them to see evil - given that evil is a valuation
    that occurs in our minds and is not an actual extant state of the
    world.

    * As a related and possibly explanatory point, L's universe
    completely is nonlocal.

        Indeed! I argue that L's monadology almost exactly anticipated
    the concept of a quantum mechanical system, since a QM system by
    definition is a windowless monad that never exchanges substances
    with others and is "simple" by L's definition. All notions of
    interactions in QM are defined internal to single QM systems as
    the scattering states of its Hamiltonian. This latter idea was
    explored and written about by Prof. Hitoshi Kitada as found here:
    http://www.metasciences.ac/Articles/works.html

    Roger , rclo...@verizon.net <mailto:rclo...@verizon.net>
    8/11/2012

        ----- Receiving the following content -----
        *From:* Stephen P. King <mailto:stephe...@charter.net>
        *Receiver:* everything-list
        <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>
        *Time:* 2012-08-11, 01:56:41
        *Subject:* Re: Where's the agent ? Who or what does stuff and
        is aware of stuff ?

        Hi Roger,

            I have noticed and read your posts. Might you write some
        remarks about Leibniz' concept of pre-established harmony?


        On 8/10/2012 8:53 AM, Roger wrote:
        Hence I follow Leibniz, even though he's difficult and some say
        contradictory. That agent or soul or self you have is your
        monad, the only (alhough indirectly) perceiving/acting/feeling
        agent in all of us, but currently missing in neuroscience and
        neurophilosophy.

        --


-- Onward!

    Stephen

    "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
    ~ Francis Bacon

--
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.


--
Onward!

Stephen

"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
~ Francis Bacon

--
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.

Reply via email to