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 statement.

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 example.

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 sense.



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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to