On 07 Oct 2013, at 17:20, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2013 3:56:55 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Oct 2013, at 22:00, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Qualia is experience which contains the felt relation to all other
experiences; specific experiences which directly relate, and
extended experiential contexts which extent to eternity (totality
of manifested events so far relative to the participant plus semi-
potential events which relate to higher octaves of their
participation...the bigger picture with the larger now.)
Then qualia are infinite. This contradict some of your previous
It's not qualia that is finite or infinite, it is finity-infinity
itself that is an intellectual quale.
OK. But this does not mean it is not also objective. The set of
dividers of 24 is finite. The set of multiple of 24 is infinite. For
Quanta is derived from qualia, so quantitative characteristics have
ambiguous application outside of quanta.
Yes, quanta comes from the Löbian qualia, in a 100% verifiable way.
Indeed. But that is again a consequence of computationalism.
Qualia is what we are made of. As human beings at this stage of
human civilization, our direct qualia is primarily cognitive-
logical-verbal. We identify with our ability to describe with words
- to qualify other qualia as verbal qualia. We name our perceptions
and name our naming power 'mind', but that is not consciousness.
Logic and intellect can only name public-facing reductions of
certain qualia (visible and tangible qualia - the stuff of public
bodies). The name for those public-facing reductions is quanta, or
numbers, and the totality of the playing field which can be used
for the quanta game is called arithmetic truth.
Arithmetical truth is full of non nameable things. Qualia refer to
non verbally describable first person truth.
Can arithmetical truth really name anything?
I am not sure Arithmetical Truth can be seen as a person, or anything
capable of naming things. You are stretching the words too much. I
guess that if you make your statement more precise, it will lead to an
open problem in comp.
It seems to me that we can use arithmetic truth to locate a number
within the infinity of computable realtions, but any 'naming' is
only our own attempt to attach a proprietary first person sense to
that which is irreducibly generic and nameless. The thing about
qualia is not that it is non-nameable, it is the specific aesthetic
presence that is manifested. Names are just qualia of mental
association - a rose by any other name, etc.
I think this could be made more precise by taking "our" in the Löbian
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 email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.