On 24 Apr 2014, at 19:18, 'Chris de Morsella <cdemorse...@yahoo.com>'
via Everything List wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 8:23 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: cannabis, cancer and mechanism, and climate.
On 22 Apr 2014, at 05:27, 'Chris de Morsella
<cdemorse...@yahoo.com>' via Everything List wrote:
At some level, there is only that, which is personally
experienced... each has to know God on their own, by their own way,
in their own heart. No one can - beyond, perhaps pointing out the
way to some extent -- teach or lead anyone down this path. A
spiritual quest is quintessentially a personal quest.
>>Yes, truth is in our head, and with comp, it means we can also
search it "in the head" of any (reasonable) machine.
Agreed... assuming we are reasonable machines though J but what if we
are insane machines - for the sake of discussion - wouldn't this
effect the outcome of our studying our heads and how we perceive our
machines as operating and the reductionist first principles we
derive from our search for a fundamental basis for memory, conscious
thought, awareness, self-awareness, etc?
Certainly. We can only hope to be correct/sane, or at least that by
introspection we can access to the part of us which is correct.
Of course, to derive physics, we can limit ourselves to Platonist,
correct, self-introspective machine.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that we only have a single
sample - our own experiential stream of consciousness - and what we
can infer about other entities by communicating with those that can
communicate and studying the behavior of others.
Perhaps this is enough to give us a basis on which to formulate a
generalized hypothesis - as I believe you seek to do.
I think we can start from the "generalized hypothesis". If the
"doctor" has chosen the right substitution level, the "correctness"
will be reduce to the arithmetical correctness, so as long as you
don't believe that 0=1, there should be no problem.
The arithmetical hypostases are really coming from the study of the
ideally correct machines, for the purpose of explaining constructively
the belief in a physical universe, and the ideal "theology" of the
machine. But when a machine is embedded in a long computation, it will
develop a non-monotonic layer, and other logic (more like relevance
logic) are at play. I don't think they play a role in physics, but
they do play a big role in the everyday concrete lives.
>>Spiritual quest is personal, but yet, might concern everybody.
Very true... and it might also be said that the growth of one is the
growth of all.. as the suffering of one is the suffering of all, but
I have no proof of this statement LOL
Some buddhist said that it is enough that one man is enlightened for
all men being enlightened, and some bodhisattva said that the
genuine bodhisattva will go to heaven only after every one has.
Of course this leads to some problems in case there are two
bodhisattvas, but buddhism is not afraid of those little technical
difficulties. It can even cultivate them, to help people not taking
them too much literally, like with the zen koans.
>>Spiritual quest is personal, but the result are often described as
"anti-personal", like "killing the ego", "merging with the one",
"becoming god", "realizing the unity/unicity of consciousness", etc.
Perhaps... though I believe that is not the best perspective. It is
not so much about "killing the ego" - I would argue -- as was
famously said during the early days of the psychedelic movement --
(which is a kind of egotistical thing to do <grin>); rather I have
come to feel it is about understanding the "ego" and it's place.
I agree very much. I could show you many link in entheogen forum where
I defend that idea. I often explain that the difficulty of the path is
that not only you have to "kill the ego", but you have to resurrect it
for the "coming back in the village", which is the most difficult
thing to do on the path.
In the hypostases, the little ego *is* played by the beweisbar box
([]p). It is the rationalist, with all his personal 3p memories, and
it is the one who really do the entire job, as all the other
hypostases are defined by it.
Yes, the real deep wiseness, the real killing of the ego has to go as
far as even abandoning the idea of killing the ego, which has to be
respected, and only, in practice, lead it to find something like its
"right place". If not illumination becomes equivalent with dying,
which will limit the communication and the teaching (by examples).
Seeing what its role is in existence and what its purpose is and why
we have these self-important egos, and what these entities are, how
they operate etc.
The ego is your body, including the 3p memories. It is the one I call
sometimes the 3p self. The ego of PA is the representation of PA
elementary initial beliefs (the axioms, written in some language/body/
machine). It is the one in command, and it is the one who has to "kill
the ego", symbolically, because after you need to wash the dishes!
Once the ego is perceived - from a perspective outside of the ego,
and the deeper (perhaps one more level of inner reflection going on)
entity that perceives the ego for what it is makes sense of this
layer of personality the ego and it's purpose can be better
understood and the individual may come to realize that there exists
a transcendent "i" (maybe less personal and more universally centered)
Or 'uncentred', somehow. It makes you realize that the ego is
relative, and that all ego belongs to the universal person, somehow.
and perhaps there is belly laughter as the ego's many foibles and
funnies becomes manifest.
But is it really against the ego? Isn't rather seeing the ego more
clearly for what it is?
I agree a lot.
Like often in those water, the statements that we can do must look
paradoxical. The ego is like common sense, it is the only thing we
have, to go beyond the ego and beyond common sense.
In fact you can "kill the ego" only by loving it and respecting it.
When this is misunderstood, the liberation technic becomes a
brainwashing technic. The frontier between the liberation technic and
brainwashing technic is thin, and that might explain how so many sects
exist.
>>Love also is personal, and cannot be enforced. There are many
things like that.
Agreed
The definition by Theaetetus of the notion of knowledge, when
applied to Gödel's arithmetical provability predicate ([]A), and its
intensional variants, suggests many such annuli, where truth not
only extends the machines abilities to communicate rationally, but
where the attempts to communicate them only forces or builds the
counter-example(*).
The notion of god maximizes the gap between use and mention.
Somehow, it looks like only the devil dares the mention of god,
especially in normative statements. With comp god is creative and
"god" is destructive.
Lao-tseu seems right: the foolish talks, the wise stays mute.
Lao-Tseu wrote many words of wisdom and poetry.
Yes. Tchouang-Tseu too. My favorite taoist is Lie-Tseu, for his
classic treatise on the perfect nothingness. Lie-tseu is also closer
in the detail to Plotinus and to the universal machine.
Sound rich machines say already something similar: <>t -> ~[]<>t.
(<>t = ~[]f )
Bruno
(*) There are three important most "obvious" annuli: G* \ G, Z* \
Z, and X* \ X,
and their computationalist "1" variants (with p -> []p for the
atomic sentences).
Amazingly, for knowledge itself, the annuli is empty: S4Grz* \ S4Grz
is empty (and S4Grz1* \ S4Grz1 too).
I need to learn the symbolic system you are using to express
yourself. Maybe once I get through reading your book ;)
Yeah I don't know. The book can distract people by the personal (ego)
history, also. And the more technic parts still assume some knowledge
of logic---which I was still overestimating. You need to study a good
book on logic I'm afraid, like you need some amount of differential
geometry to study GR. There are no miracles here. The real bomb making
all that possible is Gödel 1931 paper, and Turing Church Post
discoveries of the universal machine. I will try to say more in the
"modal/math thread", someday.
Best,
Bruno
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/d/optout.
