On 26 Jun 2014, at 22:19, John Mikes wrote:
PGC, Brent, et all (Liz? with Dawkins quoted) - the word is
"GOD-LIKE"
what I object to. Like WHAT god of the past 20,000 years? the one
imagined as the Big Baer, or the 'author' behind the Abrahamic
Scripture, or Bruno's Univ. Machine?
Blaspheme! Blaspheme! (grin)
The universal machine is a finite "terrestrial entity", or sigma_1
arithmetical. Examples are cells, brains, computers, computer language
interpreter, your laptop, etc.
With comp, God can be Arithmetical truth (there will be noway we can
do the distinction. In fact we cannot even distinguish a more complex
machine than ourself with an arithmetic god).
John, keep in mind Gödel's theorem: we know that the arithmetical
reality (God) is inexhaustible. Löbian universal machine can only
scratch its surface, especially for the 3p sharable statement about it.
Universal machine plays the role of "man" in Plotinus (it means
"human"). Arithmetical truth plays the role of God. Machines, and thus
us with comp, can only build lanterns (theories) to explore something
which is vastly more complex than us.
That confusion might explains why you seem sometimes not much agnostic
with respect to computationalism.
Thank to Church thesis and incompleteness, mechanism is the least
reductionist soul theory possible.
Computationalism is not normative, it is more a mean toward the
"unconceivable freedom".
The Greek socials, or the Nordish brutes?
I missed Bruno's definition of atheist and agnostic and my own is
poorly formulated. I THINK (my) atheist (I) is not to include a
human-like person as a factor for the 'creation' etc., with human
attributes and deficiencies, rather leaving it to Nature(?) to
evolve as it goes. Agnostic, however, is a person (me) who BELIEVES
that the Everything includes lots of unknown and still unknowable
items in unknowable qualia and relations beyond
any inventory we so far ever assembled about Her.
That agnosticism is a theorem in machine's theology. I explained this
often with the diagonalization. It is the beauty and grandeur of
machine's reason: they can understand their limitations, in fact, if
honest with themselves, they can't miss it.
Now, with comp, Arithmetical truth" is restricted ontologically on the
computable/dovetailable truth, but the identity possible between the
universal machine and God remains in the G* minus G domain. That's why
it is a comp blaspheme. It is true (for the correct machine), but non-
justifiable, and even unassertable.
Bruno
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy <[email protected]
> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:11 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 6/25/2014 7:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Some claim that my problem in Brussels was that in the introduction
to "Conscience & Mécanisme" I make clear what I mean by agnostic
(~[] g) and atheists ([]~g). Natural language confuse easily ~[]
and []~. Modal logic is useful if only to explain that difference.
It's more complicated than that. It depends on what you mean by
"g". Is it the god of theism, who is a person who created the
world, answers prayers, and judges humans in an afterlife. Or is it
the god of deism who created the world but doesn't act in it. Or is
it one of the "gods" of mystics who is a principle or "nature" or an
unnameable and unknowable something. Literally "atheist" is one who
is not a theist, one who fails to believe in the god of theism.
Thomas Jefferson was called an atheist because he believed in the
god of deism.
This use with Jefferson as example is particular. Atheism in most
contexts is more broad, roughly the sense "belief in non-existence
of god/deities"; where the kind of god matters less.
Unless of course, this is some kind of US linguistic use/habbit or
domain bound jargon. But if this is how you've always understood the
term, then this explains why we've disagreed here before. ~[]g and
[]~g is independent of the kind of "g". PGC
Brent
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
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/d/optout.
