On 05 Nov 2012, at 12:19, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Bruno Marchal

Heraclitus' point was that in this contingent world, nothing
remains the same.

From the relevant points of view, OK, but a platonist look at the contingencies in both ways. A bit like after a WM duplication you are necessarily at both place "in the eyes of God", and you are contingently in one of the two places, from your local current point of view. To reason we need both points of view.

Of course, with the comp theory, at some point you need to define contingency and necessity more precisely, by isolating the modal notion you are using. Since Plato and Leibniz we got the math tool for doing this.




As I understand it, the naturalist fallacy is to judge that something
is good (in an ethical sense) because it is natural. Heraclitus makes
no such judgment.

I was alluding to a more widespread "naturalist fallacy": the idea that nature or matter have some basic or primary ontology. This is with us since, mainly, Aristotle, and is arguably almost wired in our brain, but it is put in difficulty by things like QM, comp, if not Plato's insights and the existence of the experience of dreams.

Bruno



I think H meant not the same river (such as the mississippi),
he meant that the river (whatever river) would not
be the same, even a movie would show visually that it has changed.
And force, velocity, temperature-- none of these remains constant,
as the appropriate sensors would show.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/5/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen


----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-11-04, 08:28:11
Subject: Re: The One is not a number but a metaphor


On 03 Nov 2012, at 12:13, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Bruno Marchal

Sorry, I misconstrued the river/man analogy. Heraclitus
said instead that a man cannot stand in the same river twice
(or even from moment to moment). It's just a statement
of contingency.


I don't believe that. In my childhood, every summer I did stand in the
same river.

Of course a river is a living being, it changes shapes, and moves in
the panorama, and the quality of the water decreased, alas, for some
time, also. But it was the same river, at least in the sense that I am
the same guy who took pleasure standing in that river.

Heraclitus commited the "naturalist error" (with respect to comp) to
identify a river with the local constitution that he assumes the
existence. But that is for me in contradiction with most use of the
word river in geography. A river is already a high level natural entity.

Le temps s'en va! Le temps s'en va!
Non Madame, le temps ne s'en va pas. C'est nous qui nous nous s'en
allons!
(French poet: literally "times go away! times go away! No Miss, times
does't go away, but *we* go away).

Bruno







Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/3/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen


----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-11-02, 13:39:24
Subject: Re: The One is not a number but a metaphor




On 02 Nov 2012, at 11:50, Roger Clough wrote:


Hi Bruno Marchal

When I refer to the One, I think of it not as a number 1
but as a metaphor.




Well, the ONE is not the number 1. OK.


The Soul is the identity of a monad, including the
supreme monad. The soul does not change, even though
the monad is constantly (rapidly) changing. The river
keeps changing, but the man standing in it remains the same.


Hmmmmmm.... why not. Too much fuzzy to be sure. Only the universal
soul can be sais not changing.
But once the soul has fallen, it forgets its universal origin, and
undergone quite big changes.







So in like manor, we can consider the One (as a metaphor,
not as a number) as the Soul of the universe, the Universal
Soul.



I don't think so. the soul is the inner God, the one you can awake
by different technic. The outer God, is beyond conceivability, even
if comp can identify it with the very complex set of code of the
arithmetical truth.
At least in the arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus.


Bruno




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- l...@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 .

--
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