Over the years there have been many references to various modal logics deployed in support of the comp theory, in particular for the analysis of categorical distinctions between third-person and first-person logical consequences. Trouble is, when Bruno refers to these logics in explanation of his points, the presentation is so technical that I for one have never been able to follow these technicalities sufficiently well for them to become intuitively obvious. Hence I've had to come up with my own amateur versions.
As David Hilbert famously said "A mathematical theory is not to be considered complete until you have made it so clear that you can explain it to the first man whom you meet on the street.". I wonder whether it would be possible, Bruno, for you to contrive some sort of "man in the street" presentation of the key logics deployed in your arguments and why indeed you regard them as so central. I suspect that this is closely related to the process you describe as interviewing the machine. Thanks in advance. David -- 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.
