On 18 Aug 2012, at 03:40, Roger wrote:

Monads as computing elements, the supreme monad
as the central processing computer chip.

I think that Leibniz's monads are in some ways similar to computer calculations, for they exist in logical, rather than physical space, and all are capable of
communications to various extents.  If I might say it this way,
they exist in holographic space, just as many think the mind exists in the brain. Each monad contains a knowledge of all or most but with limited resoljution
(clarithy of vision).

Monads are inherently blind, but constantly changing, the Supreme monad of all
(God or perhaps a computer chip)

God is infinite (except for the early greeks).
A chip is finite.
So ...



constantly and instantly updating their "perceptions"
to reflect the perceptions of all the other monads, so that each monad contains in principle a complete knowledge of the universe -- the universe being made up entirely
of monads. But an imperfect knowledge.

Why imperfect ? Each monad is a passive, near-sighted homunculus.
The distances between monads have to do with their similarities  and
the "perceptions" given to them by intellect and vision ,
and all monads have some weaknesses of vision (being near-sighted).
And clarity of vision drops off with distances (differences between monads).

Because of these imperfections, the monadic computer could operate somewhat perfectly in communication with "nearby"monads but imperfectly with regard
to the whole computing program.

This all happening in a sea of perfect harmony. In a contingent computing
world.

I appreciate your effort to look in a comp perspective, but I have searched a long time how to intepret Leibniz in comp, and I have not find a simple way to do that. Plotinus is far easier. Leibniz does not seem to be able to abandon a big part of Aristotelianism, I think, although, as a coherent reasoner, he is aware of the tension, and is very often close to a comp-coherent picture. Up to now, I would still try to interpret the monads by the natural number, perhaps, more simply.

Bruno





Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/17/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function."

--
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 .

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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