On Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 8:23:15 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 18 Feb 2019, at 20:18, Philip Thrift <cloud...@gmail.com <javascript:>> 
> wrote:
>
> On Monday, February 18, 2019 at 9:14:38 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/0SIiavzPI84/jUkaOlUdAwAJ
> This is the link to the reply in the topic "When Did Consciousness Begin?" 
> As I have said before, the modal logic and numerical semantics written 
> there is one way to approach the science of experience. But I think 
> ultimately this is a logical semantics (not a material semantics), but of 
> course belief in an actual numerical reality makes a difference.
>
> Here is something more along those lines:
>
> On modal logic and consciousness:
>
> *A Modal Logic for Gödelian Intuition*
> Hasen Khudairi
> https://philarchive.org/archive/KHUAML
>
> *Towards an Axiomatic Theory of Consciousness*
> Jim Cunningham [ https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~rjc/ ]
> https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~rjc/Cunningham.pdf
>
>
> However I think that there is ultimately a material semantics.
>
>
> I can imagine a semantic for some theory of matter, but matter itself 
> cannot be semantical. What would that mean? Even without mechanism, I have 
> no idea what that could mean.
>
>
>
>
I define material semantics here:

*Material Semantics for Unconventional Programming*
https://codicalist.wordpress.com/2018/12/14/material-semantics-for-unconventional-programming/


 

           material semantics =

                     physical (*incl.* chemical+biological)
                                 +
                     psychical (or experiential) semantics

 

>
>
>
> As for the ancient Greeks, forget Aristotle and look to Epicurus.
>
>
> I assume mechanism, and I just listen to the universal machine, with 
> machine taken in the sense of Church and Turing. The notion of matter is 
> not assumed in such definition, and we know, basically since Gödel, that 
> they exist in arithmetic (semantically, of course).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Some "offbeat" materialism I just came across that my be of interest:
>
> Terry Eagleton 
> *Materialism*, Yale University Press
> excerpt 1: https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=PErJDQAAQBAJ
> excerpt 2: 
> http://blog.yalebooks.com/2017/02/09/material-theology-and-christian-religion/
>
>
> Very nice. I would not have dare to suggest that christianism is so much 
> materialist. I am not sure this was true during the five first hundreds 
> years, but it is dogmatically so after 529 (closure of Plato’s academy).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matter is an aggregation of cuisines whose recipes arise and combine to 
> form the cookbook of nature.*
>
>
> No problem with this, on the contrary. A recipe is another name for an 
> algorithm, which is typically not made of matter, but exist in arithmetic. 
>
> And for the cooking, there is no need distinguish primary matter, which 
> cannot exist with Mechanism, and matter, which obviously exist 
> phenomenologically. 
>
> Bruno
>
>


Of course all algorithms (technically) are made of matter:

They are arrangements of glyphs of ink on paper  (like in a book), or are 
electronic dots on a screen (like you are looking at right now) or are 
magnetic polarities stored on a hard drive, etc.

That matter "has" recipes (or algorithms) is the dialectics of Codicalism.

- pt

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
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