Edgar,
On 05 Mar 2014, at 14:48, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Well, I guess for someone who thinks "plants love music" and that
the basic postulates of arithmetic somehow magically generates the
entire universe including the flow of time,
Just tell me what you don't understand in the reasoning.
At least I tell you what I assume, and expose the derivation, so you
can tell what it is that you are missing.
I have not that chance. I still don't know what are your assumptions.
it seems logical to claim that Edgar does't answer questions without
actually counting the number of questions I have and haven't
answered compared to the others on this group.
I was asking "what do you mean by "computational"".
You still avoid this issue, despite it seems to be used at the start
in your "theory".
If you had any understanding of empirical evidence and scientific
method you would quickly arrive at the correct conclusion that none
of these 3 postulates are true. But I won't be holding my breath
waiting for that to happen!
Which is again an insult. So instead of taking the opportunity to
clarify your assumption, you reply by insulting. I feel sorry, but you
do confirm the "troll theory".
Bruno
Edgar
On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 2:32:25 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2014, at 20:14, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
> I only insult people who insult me first,
No. You have insulted many people a long time before they react to the
insult. You arrive in a list, and you don't seem to have follow any
previous thread. people suggested you to read the UDA, which makes
your statement incompatible with computationalism, but it remains
unclear if your statements fit or not with computationalism, as you
don't define the term "computation" that you are using.
> which you and Liz did earlier today and yesterday by referring to me
> as "a Troll".
That was not an insult, but a question related to your way to insult
people, and of never addressing their question, except by mocking them
with an insulting tone.
> If you insult someone you should expect to receive the same.
>
> If you don't I certainly won't..... OK?
Tell us your assumption clearly. Tell us what you mean by
"computational", and this without invoking some "reality", as
computation, like most usable concept, is defined independently of any
ontology, except for some infinite set of finitely specifiable objects
(like strings, numbers, combinators, programs, ...).
A computation is what a computer do. You said that "reality computes".
Are you saying that "reality" is a computer? Is it a mathematical
c...
--
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.
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 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.
