On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 3:57:49 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 21 Feb 2019, at 20:26, Philip Thrift <cloud...@gmail.com <javascript:>> 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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> 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
>
>
> That does not assume the existence of an ontological matter. 
>
>
>
>  
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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:
>
>
> I disagree. An algorithm is an immaterial recipe to compute a function, or 
> to implement a process, and you can do that in any universal machinery, 
> implemented in the physical reality or not. The physical reality itself is 
> not produced by an algorithm, but emerges from the first person 
> indeterminacy on all consistent computational histories, structure by the 
> observable mode. That explains quanta and qualia, in a testable (and 
> tested) way.
>

(I'don't know what this test is.)



Some accept the possibility that there can be something that is immaterial.


In philosophy, *antimaterialism* can mean one of several metaphysical or 
religious beliefs that are specifically opposed to materialism 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism>, the notion that *only matter 
exists*. These beliefs include:

   - • Immaterialism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>, a 
   philosophy branching from George Berkeley of which his idealism is a type
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Dualism (philosophy of 
   mind) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind)>, a 
   philosophy which includes the claim that mental phenomena are, in some 
   respects, non-physical
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Gnosticism 
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism>, a general class of religious 
   movements which hold that human beings have divine souls trapped in a 
   material world
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Idealism 
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism>, which holds that the ultimate 
   nature of reality is based on mind or ideas
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Maya (illusion) 
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)>, a concept in various 
   Indian religions regarding the dualism of the Universe
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Platonic realism 
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_realism>, which holds that 
   certain universals have a *real* existence, in the sense of 
   philosophical realism
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Supernaturalism 
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernaturalism>
   - •  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism>Transcendentalism 
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism>, a group of ideas 
   involving an ideal spiritual state that 'transcends' the physical and 
   empirical realms

[ from Wikipedia ]


Algorithms, for those that do not admit the possibility of immaterial 
entities, must be material.



 

>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> This confuses a bit the truth of “2+2=4” and “”2+2=4””.
>
>
>
>

The only truth of the matter for 2+2=4 is that one types 2,+,2,= into a 
calculator and 4 is shown.

 

>
> That matter "has" recipes (or algorithms) is the dialectics of Codicalism.
>
>
>
> Matter can implement algorithm, with mechanism that is a (non obvious) 
> theorem. But that does not make matter primary. It belongs to the sharable 
> dreams of the universal machine.
>
> Bruno
>
>
- 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