On 05 Sep 2012, at 20:34, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/5/2012 9:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The neoplatonist conception of God does not allow It to ask such a
question.
Nor does Arithmetical Truth.
God has no self-reference power at all, as this would make it
inconsistent.
Dear Bruno,
Might it be agreeable to you to stipulate the possibility that
God (as you are defining it) does indeed have self-referential
powers and the "inconsistency" that this generates is not a problem
but a solution to the body problem?
I can be OK with this, if you take the Bp & p. So it might make sense
for the Inner God, but not for the Outer God, accepting the
arithmetical interpretation of PLotinus.
Hitoshi Kitada's work shows exactly how we can recover a notion of
action from the inconsistency at infinity. The key is to never allow
the inconsistency pollute the local logic. We see good examples of
this in the concept of omega-inconsistent theories.
Perhaps. Too fuzzy. Near 1004. You might try to translate this in S4,
S5, or S4Grz1. Here I can smell a slight perfume of sense though ;)
Bruno
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
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.
