On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 30 Jul 2014, at 15:13, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Yes, I know everybody comes at it from differing background, but AUDA with
> more generalized, clear sequence of pedagogical felicity conditions would
> be cool. I know it's out there in bits and pieces in different threads; but
> to bundle and focus it would be nice.
>
>
> For AUDA people needs to have an idea of how Gödel translated
> metamathemtical question about a theory T in the arithmetical language that
> T "understand", that is, proves or justfies.
>
> But the ultimate modal logic (G) can be explained also with the helps of
> the Knight Knaves Island of Smullyan.
>
> AUDA exploits all the nuances brought by incompleteness. By
> incompleteness, although []p, []p & p, [] & <>p, []p & <>p & p, all see the
> same (sigma_1 complete part) of reality, but they obeys different logics,
> which remains stable for the consistent, and arithmetically sound theories,
> which are needed for having the "correct" comp physics.
>
Sane04 and the large bibliographies take time. I am looking for list based
acceleration/poison.
>
>
>
>
> It would be a fine step forward, if the list and Bruno could advance on
> sharing these kinds of questions, "just do it" style, instead of servicing
> the meta spam and droning on about UDA, Step 7 and MGA.
>
>
> Oh! I would not call that meta spam. I mean compare with John Clark on
> step 3.
>
>
Of course I don't mean all of it. But it would also go too far to suggest
that there is no problem accepting the reversal and the tricky aspects of
MGA... And yes, I do have too much deja vu impression at times with those
topics here.
>
>
> Maybe resurrecting an old thread that I haven't seen could stop having to
> start from scratch. Just my virtual 2 cents. Apologies for length, but not
> much time :-) PGC
>
>
> I see that my proposition to profit of summer to make a bit of combinators
> did not meet much success.
>
That's what happens with so many posts: I have never learned of this
proposition, otherwise I'd have brought some books on my too short holiday,
including "Bird the Birding Mock is the title of this book?"
And I do try to follow most of the list but apparently can't see forest for
the trees.
>
> COMP is before all for computer science, but people seems shy to put the
> foot in the science itself. For AUDA, it is mandatory, I'm afraid.
>
I'm all for becoming member of the Awesomest Universal Dance Association (I
am the only posting member here who thinks dancing is not lame for some
reason, as everybody tolerates this regular idiotic derision {it doesn't
even work as "funny" btw, even with benefit of doubt} of people enjoying
their body movement to music clearly... you bunch of mopes!), but the
closest comp instructor lives too far away and he doesn't want to give out
or specify curriculum with carefully sequenced pedagogical
goals/progressions, reading lists, graded problems WITH exemplary solutions
not to be taken literally (I don't enjoy grinding brain and have nobody to
check the work done + I wouldn't want to force my work on some poor
instructor's time; so I like to self check, which is why Smullyan and chess
puzzle are great on pedagogical level) so that one can set their own pace
and still check.
Good instructor teaches, the best instructors make themselves gradually
redundant by connecting the learning group with the relevant material and
understanding + stepping back and getting out of the way.
So maybe you can be less afraid that putting a foot in the science is
mandatory work, unlike my local-but-too-far comp instructor who believes
perhaps that this is not "sexy enough for the people" or something...
For instance, a lot of my students are too cool for old blues, pop, rock
today. They want to mix tracks at computer right away, but as it is
foundation of almost anything musically... you can't avoid a little blues
for 20th century styles. So if I try to convince them that Clapton matters
for historical reasons xyz... they will rightfully not give a fecal
deposit. But if I tell the story to "Tears in Heaven", tell them to pick
out the next class trip "guitar at campfire or party situation" and how
un-sexy people can at certain times suddenly do sexy things with kitchy
songs and score status points... suddenly they tend to care more, believe
it or not.
Same song, same difficulties... but if students believe it isn't sexy, it
might be because the instructor believes in the not-sexyness. Löbian, too
Löbian...pff! PGC
--
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.
