On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 5:24:27 AM UTC-5 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > I comment both Benjamin and Lawrence. > > > > On 12 Mar 2021, at 16:56, Lawrence Crowell <goldenfield...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 4:30:26 PM UTC-6 medinuclear wrote: > >> [*Brent Meeker*] >> >> “https://alwaysasking.com/why-does-anything-exist/#A_Story_of_Creation” >> >> [*Philip Benjamin*] If nothing ever existed, nothing can exist today. >> “Ex nihilo, nihil fit” (Parmenides). >> > > OK. Key point. > > > > > Laws of any kind necessarily requires the existence of a conscious Law >> Giver. >> > > But here I disagree. Consciousness will be the non provable truth (about > machine and by machine) related to their belief in some reality including > oneself. Introspective machine/number can’t miss it. > > > > > > The logical question is: “what is more reasonable?” DEAD MATTER producing >> life or LIFE producing both dead matter and life-forms? Only a degree of >> rationality can be established here. >> >> > Both in the arithmetical reality, and in the physical reality, life is a > simple consequence of the so called second recursion theorem by Kleene. It > is the fact that piece of codes can encode all it needs to protect itself, > to reproduce itself, to grow, develop, organise and evolved… > > Now, the physical reality is not a primitive primary reality, but an > illusion common to all relative numbers, in almost all of their consistent > histories. > > > > > > > The laws are constructs of the human mind. [Lawrence] > > > The expression of the laws are constructs of the human mind, but I guess > you are OK that F=GmM/r^2 was as much approximately true before human life > appears on this planet and after. OK? > > > > > > > > > > There may be patterns in nature, and we inductively infer them as laws. > > > … OK, and we can sometimes deduce some laws from other, and verify with > Nature. Then there are some mathematical laws, that we find by > introspection and dialog with others. > This is neutral with respect to the question of the origin of the physical > reality. With Mechanism, the physical reality does not need to be assumed, > and in fact cannot be assumed if we want get both the quanta and the > qualia, as this requires a much simpler theory, like any Turing universal > system/theory. > > > The idea there must be a mind for anything to exist is silly. > > > Yes. It is like abandoning to try to explain mind (and matter). It is > better to not assume neither mind nor matter as fundamental. But we have to > assume at least one universal machinery, and the old Pythagorean one works > very well (natural numbers + the laws making it in a Turing universal > system). > > > > Where did the mind come from, and if such a mind existed there was then no > true nothingness. > > > Yes. In fact it is the empty explanation “God made it”, which might work, > actually, but only with a mathematically precise theory of God, and an > explanation of it build the physical reality, or how it makes us believe in > a physical reality. > > With mechanism we assume only “very elementary arithmetic” (PA without the > induction axioms), and derive from this the existence of the universal > numbers, and get physics from their own notion of observable. Physics > becomes a statistics on the relative experience/dream by numbers emulated > in Arithmetic, in virtue of the laws of + and *. > > What people miss is that the notion of computation is purely an > arithmetical notion. See the book by Martin Davis, and its chapter 4, for a > proof of this, but Gödel’s 1931 contains it already implicitly. Gödel > missed it because he missed the Church-Turing thesis, and was quite > skeptical until 1936 where he was convinced by Turing. > > As I indicated nothingness is a sort of self-annihilating concept, nothingness annihilates nothingness meaning there is something. Does nothingness exist? If it does then by having existential properties it is not true nothingness. Maybe it is more the quantum vacuum. If nothingness does not exist then there must be something.
Even the theological argument of creati ex nihilio is self-defeating, for there had to be a God in that argument. Does God exist? If so then there was not truly nothingness. If God does not exist the argument is meaningless. BTW, I have Davis's book. He was a part of the quartet who showed the Hilbert thesis for a single method of p-adic numbers was false. > > > > [Benjamin:] > > Civilized, erudite Phoenician, profligate pagan Augustine of >> Greco-Roman roots was instantly TRANSFORMED into a non-pagan and pulled the >> West off Greco-Roman paganism and superstitions >> > And this lead to a 1000 year dark age. Besides, Augustine was not Phoenician but Berber. The original inhabitants of Carthage were dispersed or killed by the Romans with the 3rd Punic War. Carthage was largely a Roman city after that. > (https://www.midwestaugustinians.org/conversion-of-st-augustine). Thus he >> was the chief architect of Western Civilization built on the foundation of >> the Apostolic discourse at Athenian Mars Hill (*Acts 17*) where the >> Greco-Roman Unknown god was identified as the aseitous Adonai (plural) YHWH >> (singular) Elohim (uni-plural) of the Patriarchs, Prophets and the >> Apostles. >> >> Progressive pagans with un-awakened consciousness cannot escape the >> questions of causality, aseity, morality, meaning and telos by simply >> evading them or assuming illogically the aseity of Dead Matter. >> > > I think that most “progressive pagans” never really assumed the existence > of Dead Matter, nor even of any Matter, to begin with. > > Bruno > Besides the discourse with Paul at Mars hill was a part of his program of establishing a new system of social control. This was why Paul made Christianity a success. He turned it into a social structure which appealed to some authority or truth "up there" and inaccessible to reasoning. This is an early version of Orwell's Big Brother, an imaginary all powerful and vengeful being who knows all --- "Big Brother is watching you." It is completely antithetical to scientific and rational reasoning. LC -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8bedf4c8-44e7-4777-a09e-4aaec18933a7n%40googlegroups.com.
