On 2/13/2013 5:40 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
[SPK wrote: ]'reality = best possible simulation".
I just realized how to translate that into my view: "Reality = making
the most sense possible." Same thing really. That's why I talk about
multisense Realism, with Realism being the quality of maximum
unfiltered sense. Since sense is subtractive, the more senses you have
overlapping and diverging, the less there is that you are missing.
Reality = nothing is missing (i.e. only possible at the Absolute
level), Realism = you can't tell that anything is missing from your
perceptual capacity/inertial frame/simulation.
There is something else that we must discuss in what you wrote! I
think that "you can't tell that anything is missing from your perceptual
capacity/inertial frame/simulation" has nothing to do with realism at
all. We get that illusion of completeness precisely because the
necessary conditions for having Sense are met. (This is part of the
fixed point stuff.)
If you are conscious at all at any level you will automatically
not be able to percieve any 'holes' or inconsistencies in your personal
1p 'Sense of all that is", as othe Sense that one has must be have
relational closure to some degree, otherwise we have at least one
instant infinite regress in one's dictionary of concept relations. This
reasoning is a key part of my motivation to claim that 'reality', for
any single observer (up to isomorphisms) must be representable as a
Boolean algebra: it must be that all of its propositions (when
considered as a lattice of propositions) are mutually consistent. This
mutual consistency does not come for free, pace Bruno, but is dependent
on the resources available to compute the Sense content. One must have a
functioning physical brain to think...
A digression: This universal restriction of Boolean algebraic
representability on observable content seems to back up that @$$_*)&#
Noam Chomsky's universal grammar "law" but I think that the Piraha'
people's language <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirah%C3%A3_language>
points out that there can be non-recursive 'bubbles' in a overall global
network of recursive relations. (Chomsky's idea that language is
causally determined by a genetically determined capacity seems to be the
distilled essence of rubbish, in my not so humble opinion btw.)
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.