On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote
>>Your step-3 confusion. >> >> > >> >> If one isn't confused by gibberish then one doesn't have critical >> thinking skills. > > > I gave you the precision asked, John Clark must have missed that post, all the ones John Clark saw were nothing but a chaotic mass of wall to wall unattributed pronouns . > >> >> Nobody needs to assume mechanism because it can be demonstrated. > > > > > That is just ridiculous. But if you have a demonstration, please give it > to us. Speaking of ridiculous, you know you've reached that point when somebody demands a demonstration of physical cause and effect. > > >>> > >>> > Calculation have been defined mathematically, >> >> >> > >> > >> And a definition can't calculate one damn thing; never has never will. > > > > That shows that the definition of calculation cannot calculate. Yes, and a definition of a calculator can't calculate either, but calculator can. > > But calculation calculated And a calculation can't calculate, but a calculator can. >> >> Unlike God matter and atoms are *NOT invisible*. > > > > > You (again) seem to play with the words. > Playing with words my ass. Matter and atoms are visible but the invisible man in the sky is, well, invisible. > > > If you need to assume a physical reality, it is primitive by definition. > To hell with "primitive"! If you're interested in consciousness, and that seems to be the only thing you are interested in, then it's irrelevant if matter is "primitive" or not; either way if you want consciousness you're going to need something physical. . > > > I was alluding to the primary or primitive notion of matter. > I know you were, I want to know why. Even if you had a proof that was so good it even convinced me that mathematics was more fundamental than physics (and you have no such proof) if wouldn't change the fact that calculations as well as intelligence and consciousness require something physical. >> >> If you insist on changing the language and calling matter "God" then >> you're going to have to invent a new work for a *invisible* conscious >> person who created the universe, but such a word game is not science >> or mathematics or even philosophy, it's just silly. > > > > > Why would you invoke a notion of God only for a God which does not exist. > You don't invoke the notion of God, like most educated people you reject the notion of a omnipotent omniscient conscious person who created the universe, but like most people you DON'T reject the English word "G-O-D" hence your radical redefinitions and your silly word game. And now dear Bruno that's your cue to start talking about the ancient Greeks as if people who didn't even know where the sun went at night would be of the slightest help in solving modern scientific problems. >> >> Well, perform one calculation without using matter and the laws of >> physics and I'll stop believing in that "God". Just add 2+2, that's all I >> ask. > > > > > You ask me something totally impossible and totally irrelevant, > T otally impossible yes but not totally irrelevant, in fact that impossibility is saying something of vital importance about the nature of our world and it might be wise to listen to what it's saying. > > "primary matter is needed for having the existence of computations in > general". > Forget the "primary" crap. Matter is needed for the existence of computations period. Something else may or may not be needed for existence of matter but it wouldn't change the fact that matter is needed for the the existence of computations. > > Nobody should talk like if he/she knew the truth. > I may not know The Truth, but I know nonsense when I hear it. 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
