On 11 Sep 2017, at 17:20, David Nyman wrote:

On 11 September 2017 at 15:56, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:

On 11 Sep 2017, at 11:23, David Nyman wrote:

On 11 Sep 2017 9:22 a.m., "Bruno Marchal" <[email protected]> wrote:

On 10 Sep 2017, at 22:25, Brent Meeker wrote:



On 9/10/2017 10:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
So I assume elementary arithmetic; I prove the existence of the universal number(s), then I define a notion of rational belief "scientific belief", (Plotinus discursive reasoner) by Gödel's (sigma_1 arithmetical) beweisbar Bp. That makes sense, due to incompleteness which prevent provability to be a notion of knowledge.

This seems problematic to me. I understand why you do it; because you want knowledge to be true belief (not just true provable belief). But this does violence to the usual meaning of knowledge (c.f. Getteir for example).

Yes. Incompleteness makes provability into belief instead of knowledge. Gödel mention this already in 1933.




It means that given some undecidable proposition one of us can assert it and the other deny it, and then one of us will know it. ??

Ih he proves it (correctly or not). Knowledge is Bp & p, which is impossible if p is not provable (~Bp). We just cannot know an undecidable (by us) proposition, by definition, although we can bet on it, but then it is different kind of knowledge (closer to Bp & Dt). That we can know for bad reason is the ultimate lesson of the dream argument. People like Malcom who dislike Mechanism are forced into disbelieving the existence of consciousness in dreams, as he did.

Yes, I think the difficulty Brent may be having with this is that the notion of belief in play here is to be understood as ramifying in some limit (delineated by the FPI) to that of physical structure and action.

That follows once we assume the mechanist hypothesis.



Consequently it constitutes, in the first place, an idiosyncratic commitment to truths that may or may not correspond, in part or in whole, to what is more generally 'believed'. Nonetheless, commitments of this sort cannot be disentangled from their own proper, and equally undoubtable, truth values, however misleading these may ultimately turn out to be in a wider context. They are, as you say, more in the nature of bets on a reality,

In this case it is a weaker bet on absence of change in consciousness for some self-transformation, but OK, that is the "reality" in the sense of "Dt", arguably.

​Yes, that's what I meant.​ We can't know what lies 'beyond' our perceptions, but we can take a risk on our conjectures, refined by a process of evolution.​​

With multidimensional "Darwinian like story (universal number chatting) above the substitution level, and infinitely many projections on all computations, below the substitution level. The logics (hypostases) operate *at* any correct level.



​which in general of course is consistent with the unavoidable rigour of an evolutionary logic. This is the crucial distinction between primary or perceptual undoubtability and secondary reliability that I've previously remarked on. And as is indeed the case with any serious bet, they represent an inescapable commitment that puts the bettor permanently at hazard.

OK.
It seems to me also that there are nested levels of such beliefs and their associated truths. Hence what is, at a certain level, an idiosyncratic commitment to what we would normally think of as something non veridical, as in a dream, may be nested within a more general or systemic commitment to a consistent and more generally shared physical reality (i.e. what will appear in phenomenal terms as a brain and its generalised environment).

Probably, but the initial nested "levels" we have should be given by the hypostases p, Bp, etc. and also the graded B^n p & D^m t, with m bigger than n. With p sigma_1 they all provide a quantization, and thus the physical reality is layered in some sense. There are no "correct dream" within a dream, because physical correctness appears when "you" are distributed all (infinitely many) most probable relative history. This might be related to what you say here.

​I think it might be. The idea is that the probabilities converge on what we might then call a canonical (shared) reality.

Exactly.


It plays some role in the "after life", making it a bit closer to to the Tibetan Bardo Todol. A poet said that there are only two certainties: taxes and death, but that was still wishful thinking​ :​

​I know, and I can't honestly say this ​has ​give​n​ me much comfort​.​


Hmm...





there is only one certainty: taxes.

​Or this :(​


I might be wrong on this. The universal machine does not pay taxes (well, not yet!). There is (from experience reports) a state of consciousness which needs no energy, nor time, etc.

So I guess the Greek were right on this God (the One) might be Good.

The lies are the plea of the terrestrial condition, but all path converge on the limit of infinity (in some computer science theoretical sense). Except that it might not be easy, there is bardo todol, but apparently it leads to the "liberation".

Hell or hellish experience exists, in arithmetic (assuming mechanism) and harm reduction strategy are possible, The Good seems to be good as far as it is possible, and it might be our part to navigate prudently.

The current problem is that we tolerate the lies. We don't invest in education and research and many confuse money as a mean with money as a goal, which promote the lies and the fake speculations. I think classical greek should be mandatory for every one!

Well, as long as theology and metaphysics are not taken seriously the charlatan will continue to do the politics, and exploits the fear when not creating it.

Bruno







David


Bruno

PS B^n p is BBBB...Bp, with n Bs. (B^0 p = p, by convention).


David


Bruno




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 everything- [email protected].
Visit this group at https://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 everything- [email protected].
Visit this group at https://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 everything- [email protected].
Visit this group at https://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 https://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 https://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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to