On 14.05.2013 21:29 Bruno Marchal said the following:


On 14 May 2013, at 19:12, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:

...

In the last case, a male bird catches a fish and gives it to the
bride. Could we consider a fish as a sign in this case?

I do not know what happens under comp but I personally see no
possibility to find signs under physicalism. Hence currently I follow
people who preach Peircean metaphysics of the sign.

OK.
I think that with comp you can interpret the sign as the elements of
recursively enumerable set (of numbers, or whatever), with their
intensional meaning defined by the (universal numbers) supporting them
(context). Signs are interesting, they live near the syntax/semantic
fixed points. They plausibly speed up computations. But I have not
studied Peirce, like I would say ... I give time to Plato and Plotinus
(and Descartes, and the Taoists notably Lie Ze, and Lewis Carroll, Alan
Watts, ...).

A nice definition of a sign. Do you have some more written in this respect? I would like to understand it.

About the fish you should ask the bride. I think it is a sign.

Yeah, the "correct" signs, for a male spider is a matter of mating or be
eaten:

What is the difference in comp between a fish and a human being?

Evgenii

--
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