On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, John Mikes wrote:
Dear Edgar: allow me not to copy your post the 8th time, just
marking the #s of your par-s into my short remarks.
#1
As long as we don't "know" ALL of the (external?) complexity-stuff
we cannot claim 'knowledge' of any 'reality',
An (ideal, sober) scientist will *never* claim knowledge of any
reality. The very idea that there is a reality satisfying his/her
belief is already asking for an act of faith, which is the "religious"
part of any exploration.
only quote the so far received part and that, too, as adjusted into
our contemporary mental ways.
Compare such stuff of today with a similar 'analysis' 3000 years
ago...
Is 'today' different in the continuing course of past to future?
(cf: #5)
#2
I would not mix the (final?) theoretical conclusion with our
practical ways of today. We live and so did our forefathers '3000
years ago' (or whenever).
#3
I would not mix the 'final (theoretical?) conclusion' about the
entire world into a contemporary human-mind product (our logic).
#4
You (I?) cannot compare the today available portion - and that
transformed into human belief - with the entirety of the infinite
complexity so I would not mention "truth". Again: compare your
contemporary 'truth' concepts with a similar stance - say - of 3000
years ago. Did Ishtarians have the same 'truth'?
#5
Right you are. What was 'true' for UGGH the caveman is different
from what you described as 'true' for today. Do you think that 5000
years into the future - if humanity survives that long - our
descendants will find the SAME truth as we may identify today?
In science, we do not find "truth" in a sense that we can justify. We
can only propose "belief", and with some luck, we can see them refute
in the life time.
Now, we *can* believe that UGGH find the fire to be hot, and the night
to be dark, and that 17 is prime, if we give him/her the definition.
And one more thing: (last par) I would not be so firm that 'our'
internal model of reality is representing the 'external' reality at
all. We just don't know about that 'external' stuff and our present
internal ideas about it are our human fabrications.
They always will be, in the terrestrial plane. It is "universal
numbers" fabrication and selection. Even with non-comp, humans are
particular case of universal numbers. What you say can be generalized
on them. With comp we are not "more", in computability power, than
universal numbers, and so their limitation apply to us.
I do not believe it is time to think of a "Final" Theory.
Why? If we don't think about a "final theory" and build it, it will
never been refuted, and we will never learn on the "final" thing. I
think we can always thing of a "final" theory. What we can never do it
is to know it is final. But this we will never know, at least in
normal state of consciousness but probably in all state of
consciousness in which communication can make sense.
What would be like a better time to think of a "final theory"?
Bruno
John Mikes
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]>
wrote:
All,
In response to the discussion of the possibility of a "Final Theory"
I'm starting a new topic on the Nature of Truth since this is an
important and separate issue from previous discussions.
1, it is impossible to directly know the external fundamental
reality, we know external reality only filtered through the
structures of our own minds. What we really know is only our own
mental model of external reality which is provably very very
different than actual external reality.
2, However we can easily prove that we do know external fundamental
reality to an extent sufficient for us to function reasonably
effectively within it. If we didn't have some actual true knowledge
of external reality we could not even function within it and thus
could not exist. So our very existence in actual reality
demonstrates we do have some true knowledge of it. (This true
knowledge consists of snippets of logical structure rather than the
physical world we believe it to be.)
3. External reality is a consistent logical structure. It is
computed, and for it to be computed it must follow consistent
logical rules.
4. Therefore the only real test of truth is its internal logical
consistency over the entire scope of knowledge. We can not directly
compare our knowledge to the external world because it is filtered
through the structures of our own senses and minds, but we do know
that our knowledge is truth to the extent it is internally self-
consistent over maximum scope.
5. In fact this is the actual working basis of scientific method,
forensics, our successful functioning in daily life and in all human
endeavors that seek truth. Namely is the body of knowledge in
question internally consistent. If it is not then something is UNtrue.
This is the Consistency Theory of Knowledge. Consistency over
maximum scope IS truth, the only truth possible to know.
There is and can be no direct knowledge of truth, there is only
consistency.
This applies to all types of truth, from the logical structures in
daily life moment to moment, as well as to knowledge of a "Final
Theory".
There is however one important exception. Our mental model of
reality is part of the actual external reality, and we do have
direct knowledge of that. The truth of that is the thing itself. But
its truth is an internal mental model of external reality, not the
external reality it pretends to be.
Edgar
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
