On 11 Jan 2014, at 15:43, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
You wrote:
"AR provides the neutral monism!
Comp is neutral monism. Neither mind, nor matter are taken as
primitive. Both emerge from the additive-multiplicative structure of
arithmetic (AR), and that structure provides the neutral stuff."
Ontological neutrality is that there are no particular properties or
orders.
No. Not in the most common standard sense.
Also, if your ontology is so unstructured, how do you use it to derive
the other things? It does not make sense to me.
AR has a particular set of properties and an order, thus it cannot
be considered as neutral.
Neutral monism, in the philosophy of mind, means that we don't
presuppose neither mind, nor body, and that we account of both of them
from something else (here the arithmetical reality).
It must includes all possibilities and orderings equally.
It contains all computations, and much more, indeed. That is why it
can work at all.
Numbers have particular properties and orders so how is it that you
can think of them as being a neutral monism?
Because they are neither belonging to the mind, nor to the physical
reality.
In all theories you have to assume something from which you can
account for other things. The nothing theory assumes some notion of
things, like set theoretical axioms, or a energy vacuum, etc.
No Bruno, you are advocating a form of Idealism,
Then you make the numbers into a product of the human mind, but with
comp, the human mind is handled by purely arithmetical notion (like
relative universal numbers, computations, etc.).
Explaining the number with the human mind is a non-comp attempt to
explain the simple by the very complex. It is like "God did it", or a
ignorance-gap type of explanation.
Comp defines computations and machines from arithmetic. It is a much
more fertile way to proceed, as we do agree on the few properties of
numbers. But nobody agrees on term like mind, human mind, becoming,
which are fuzzy philosophical jargon.
almost like Berkeley, but unlike Berkeley you do not fall prey to
Mr. Johnson's criticism by appealing to the "kickability" of prime
numbers,
OK.
the truth of theorems (within theories), etc. Nice move, but it is
still flawed.
It is not a move. It is derived from an assumption. If numbers exists
only in the human mind, then all machines exists only in the human
mind, and I am not sure I can say "yes" to digitalist doctor in that
case.
Bruno
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 11 Jan 2014, at 06:05, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Brent,
I will try a crude summary and hope to not be misunderstood... It
starts with the Stone duality, a well known isomorphism between
Boolean algebras and totally disconnected compact Hausdorff spaces.
The former are identified with minds (logical, computational,
numerical, etc) and the latter with physical objects (what is more
"physical" that a space that looks exactly like Democritus' "atoms
in a void"?.
This solves the mind-body linkage problem of Descartes' dualism.
The paper then discusses how interactions between pairs of minds
(generalizations of Boolean algebras identified as "states") is
mediated via pairs of bodies (generalizations of Stone spaces to
include mass, spin, charge, potentials,... physics identified as
"events"). A crude diagram of this relation for the evolution of a
single entity is:
... -> Body -> Body' -> ...
| |
... <- Mind <- Mind' <- ...
where the "|" symbol is the Stone isomorphism, "->" is the physical
evolution of one event to the next and "<-" is the logical arrow of
implication.
Mathematics as considered my most people usually ignores
evolution of logical structures, such as Boolean algebras, and so
the difference between mind and mind' is not considered. Now that
computers are commonplace, the idea that logical structures evolve
makes a lot more sense! A computation is the transformation of
information and since logical structures capture the relations of
the information, it is natural to consider this theory.
In this theory, minds and bodies (including brains!) are not
separable substances but are isomorphs that have "dynamics" whose
"arrows" point in opposite directions. Physical process moves
forward from event to event' in sequences of time according to
thermodynamics, etc. and logic "looks" backward to ensure that any
new state is consistent with previous states. This implies an
elegant solution to the measurement problem of QM! Differences
between states and parameters of time can be subdivided as finely
as one wishes; even to the smoothness of continua.
It is what the logical 'side of the coin" does to select physical
events that won me over to Pratt's theory: a physical transition
from event x at time t to event x' at time t' is allowed if and
only if the state x'* at t' does not imply information that would
contradict prior states at t^-1, t^-2, etc. Basically, events will
occur iff they do not imply a contradiction of previously allowed
events. This automatically solves the White Rabbit problem by
disallowing events that imply logical contradictions.
It also gives a slightly different take on computational
universality: individual logical structures are associated with
equivalence classes of physical functions and physical systems are
associated with equivalence classes of logical structures. The
equivalences are, respectively: equivalent function and semantical
equivalence. Thus computations and the physical processes are not
ontologically isolated from each other, but universality obtains
because there is no a priori bijective map between the set of
particular physical systems and the set of particular Turing
universal computations.
?
It seems that Pratt abandoned the theory because of a lack of
interest in the community but still hosts the papers on his
website. Maybe in hope that some one might come along, like me,
that can make sense of it and develop it further. It does not
consider SR at all, which bothers me a little bit, but that can be
fixed using ideas such as those of Kevin Knuth, IMHO.
It is a nice idea, but it does not take into account the FPI (he is
unaware of it), and so does not address the comp mind-body problem.
Its main prediction is that neither ghosts (logics that cannot be
associated with any physical structure) nor zombies (bodies that
cannot be represented by an internal self-referencing logical
structure) exist. This argues against both material and mental
monism. (Thus my conflict with Bruno's AR!)
AR provides the neutral monism!
Comp is neutral monism. Neither mind, nor matter are taken as
primitive. Both emerge from the additive-multiplicative structure of
arithmetic (AR), and that structure provides the neutral stuff.
Bruno
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 9:02 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 1/10/2014 2:23 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Brent,
Vaughn Pratt's dualist theory is consistent with QM and does
show a mechanism that prohibits White Rabbits. It is intelligible
to anyone that puts forth the effort to comprehend it.
Can you summarize it?
Brent
--
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/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe
.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected]
.
To post to this group, send email to everything-
[email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
Kindest Regards,
Stephen Paul King
Senior Researcher
Mobile: (864) 567-3099
[email protected]
http://www.provensecure.us/
“This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may
contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may
be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,
notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately.”
--
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 everything-
[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 a topic in
the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe
.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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.
--
Kindest Regards,
Stephen Paul King
Senior Researcher
Mobile: (864) 567-3099
[email protected]
http://www.provensecure.us/
“This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may
contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may
be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify
sender immediately and delete this message immediately.”
--
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.
