Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in
the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells
it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of
password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy
incorrectly.
Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out!
But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the
pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like
this.
She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors
of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and
positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as
one.
Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like
the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our
forebears.
Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the
equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless
waves.
Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the
universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five
senses.
Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic
revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we
are.
Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways
connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's
succession.
The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those
that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness.
Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the
cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream
states.
Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the
circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds
us.
Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the
visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> Dear Stephen,
>
> On 07 May 2013, at 22:59, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
> Dear Bruno,
>
> As a former and recovering fundamentalist Christian, I am 100% in agreement
> with your words above. I merely wish that I could communicate better with
> you.
>
>
> Thanks for telling Stephen.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 29 Apr 2013, at 11:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> You might take a look at my Plotinus paper which suggest a lexicon between
>>
>> Plotinus and Arithmetic. Plotinus might have appreciated it as
>> Neoplatonism
>>
>> announces a coming back to Pythagorean ontology. One of the Enneads of
>>
>> Plotinus, "On Numbers" is a crazily deep analysis of the role of numbers
>> in
>>
>> theology.
>>
>>
>> This one?
>> Marchal B., 2007, A Purely Arithmetical, yet Empirically Falsifiable,
>> Interpretation of Plotinus' Theory of Matter
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>>
>> Theology is just the science of "everything", which by definition includes
>>
>> God and Santa Klaus. A statement saying that such or such God does not
>> exist
>>
>> is a theological statement.
>>
>>
>> It is just my agnosticism which make me use the term in the most general
>>
>> sense. Then, in the frame of this or that hypothesis, we can get such or
>>
>> such precisions.
>>
>>
>> I like how you explain it. From a pure "marketing" standpoint, you
>> might avoid a lot of unnecessary intellectual resistance by using a
>> different term. On the other hand, some of your colourful personality
>> would not come through, so who am I to say...
>>
>>
>> Lol ... I can understand. But the resistance is both more superficial (and
>> boring), but has some deep aspect, and using the word "theology" has helped
>> me to make that clear.
>>
>> In fact I have been encouraged to use the word "theology" because it makes
>> things clearer, and it was well seen in my university (based on free-exam).
>> I got problem, unrelated to this, and I have been proposed to defend the
>> work in France, and there, I have been asked to remove anything referring to
>> theology. In particular I have used the term "psychology" in place of
>> theology, but this has led to other confusion, and an even greater
>> resistance, making me realize the existence of a fundamentalist atheism.
>>
>> The main advantage of using the term "theology" is to prevent the
>> reductionist interpretation of mechanism, and it is a way to recall that
>> science has not yet decide between Plato and Aristotle, which proposes
>> deeply different view on everything, including the type of God rationally
>> possible. Eventually it made me realize that atheism is really a slight
>> variant of christianism, when you compare to Plato. Of course some atheists
>> can be uneasy with this, but then it means that they are not aware of the
>> mind-body problem.
>>
>> I thought, perhaps naively, that most scientist where aware that science
>> was deeply agnostic, and that if we do research on the mind-body problem,
>> such agnosticism was the key to make progress. Eventually I understood that
>> the Platonist conception of reality is deeply hidden in our culture, and
>> that atheists are much more opposed to it than most intellectual having has
>> some confessional religious background (something which has astonished me,
>> but confirmed everyday since). This made atheism *theologically* more flawed
>> than christianism.
>>
>> Now, from a computer science view, "theology" is just what is true about
>> machine. We know that this is bigger than what the machine can prove, and
>> that is enough from a clear definition standpoint. The original term was
>> biology, but this led to confusion too.
>>
>> Since a long time, I read hundred of theologians from different confession
>> and religion, and well, it fits remarkably with the subject, and with what I
>> am talking about. And it is quite interesting to compare machine's theology
>> (and machine's science) with the different existing religions.
>>
>> I tend to believe that most non natural human suffering comes from that
>> sad fact: the withdrawal of theology as a science, and its political
>> institutionalization. Many fundamentalism would not exist, especially the
>> atheist one, with which I have been confronted even without knowing that. Of
>> course this doe not concern the "agnostic atheism" as the word can sometimes
>> have a larger (but confusing) meaning.
>>
>> In fact I call that theology, because it *is* theology. It concerns
>> afterlife, the soul, the origin of realities, the existence of divine (non
>> Turing emulable) entities, gods and goddesses, etc... and I am all against
>> introducing new words when older words already exist, because that create
>> big and unnecessary confusions. It helps also to refer to the theology of
>> the Platonists and Neoplatonists. I read quite remarkable book on that
>> subject.
>>
>> I am aware some resistance can come from the use of that word, but it
>> seems to me the advantages, notably clarity, are more numerous than the
>> disandvantages. I might be wrong, but I am not yet convinced.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> There is not scientific evidence whatsoever of this. Nor do I think it
>>
>> can be. People like António Damásio (my compatriot) and other
>>
>> neuroscientists confuse a machine's ability to recognise itself with
>>
>> consciousness. This makes me wonder if some people are zombies.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Careful!
>>
>> Some people don't think, but are still conscious, most plausibly. I guess
>>
>> you were joking.
>>
>>
>>
>> I meant the opposite: people who think but are not conscious. I'm
>>
>> half-joking.
>>
>>
>>
>> OK (I was half serious) :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> You are right about Damásio. he confuses [] p and (([] p  &  p).
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure I understand. Doesn't []p => p ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, but only God knows that.
>>
>>
>> Precisely (but I will give the detail on FOAR): if B is Gödel's
>> provability
>>
>> we have that G* proves []p => p, but G does not prove it. You can guess it
>>
>> as if G prove [] f => f (with f = the propositional constant false, and
>> "=>"
>>
>> the logical implication), then it would mean that the machine proves ~[]
>> f,
>>
>> and so the machine would proves its own consistency, contradicting Gödel's
>>
>> second incompleteness theorem. But G* proves it, and proves that the
>> machine
>>
>> is correct: []p => p.
>>
>>
>> This is capital. It is Gödel's incompleteness which makes provability
>>
>> obeying the logic of believability, and which gives sense to the
>> Theaetetus'
>>
>> definition of knowledge for machine.
>>
>>
>> Ok, I need to read more.
>>
>>
>> If interested, you might subscribe to Russell Standish's FOAR group, where
>> I intend to come back on this.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree on intelligence, but I don't feel less conscious when I'm
>>
>>
>> sleepy. Just differently conscious. I'm a bit sleepy right now.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That's something amazing with consciousness. It exists in different
>>
>> modes.
>>
>> We are not trained to develop vigilance during sleep, but sleep produces
>>
>> a
>>
>> lot of intriguing altered state of consciousness.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, it's so frustrating to not be able to come back with the full
>>
>> memories.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For REM dreams and non-REM conscious episode, it is a question of a (lot
>> of)
>>
>> training, but some plants can help.
>>
>> For example calea zacatechichi (legal everywhere except in Belgium),
>>
>>
>> I've seen that once mentioned before in the context of lucid dreaming.
>>
>>
>> I am a bit skeptical about Calea zacatechichi. Studies on mice have shown
>> that it perturbs only the non REM dreams, and I have not found any
>> convincing report that it might lead to lucidity. It can be part of a ritual
>> helping some placebo effect making higher the probability to develop
>> lucidity in dream, though. Coffee is more efficacious, but careful as it can
>> lead easily to insomnia.
>> Calea zacatechichi is also incredibly bitter. Calea tea is almost non
>> swallowable at all, and the bitterness stays in the month for weeks. If you
>> want get rid of some friends, just offer them a cup of calea zacatechichi !
>> :)
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>> Google Groups "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/K7E-Vfwj4QU/unsubscribe?hl=en.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
> --
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to