On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: >>> In both diaries, those who predicted 'no break of symmetry', >>> >> >> >> Who in hell predicted no break of symmetry? >> > > > You. >
BULLSHIT. >> One will see Moscow and one will not, nobody thinks that is symmetrical. >> If things were symmetrical there would only be one person regardless of how >> many bodies there were; there needs to be a break in symmetry for the >> concepts of "you" and "me" to be meaningful. >> > > > Good. You disagreed with this some time ago. > BULLSHIT. > just a very simple case of first person indeterminacy. > Which is just a pompous and needlessly complex way of saying "I don't know". > we get that first person indetermlinacy from logic and the working of a > computer > The idea that we can't know what we will see or do next came from that great thinker Og the caveman and he used induction not logic to develop it; he remembered that he didn't know what he would do next in the past and he figured that trend, just like everything else, would probably continue into the future. Only much later did Turing discover that the same conclusion could be derived from logic. > the guy in Moscow see moscow, and not washington, you have to agree > that his [HIS?!!!] prediction "w & m" was wrong > As usual Bruno Marchal can't continue without a ambiguous pronoun fix, in this case it's "his". > is that possible when we assume comp? What do you think? > What do I think? I think that I don't give a rat's ass about "comp". John K Clark -- 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.
