[FRIAM] Kolmogorov-Chaitin Complexity in the context of Natural Language and Philosophy

[Steve Smith]

Owen - Most philosophical discussions of this ilk simply end in semantic deadly embrace.  They are eventually resolved, if ever, at great cost of word length. I agree with the sentiment, but if we were to caste this into a set-theoretic (or algebraic) framework, I think we would find some interesting features.   I'm not sure, however, that such discussions can truly be placed into a formalism.   I would find it interesting (entertaining, instructive) if you could elaborate how you think such a mapping would be done.   I believe these discussions to (naturally, inherently) transcend formal logic. The Kolmodorov complexity is quite low:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity in that much compression could be attained. I think someone did try to formulate an algorithmic description of the discussion:     Read everything written in the Western Philosophical Tradition     Focus on Kant     Focus on the New Realists     Think real hard about all of the above     Lay in the grass and intend to get up without doing so (my contribution)     Discuss your interpretation of 3, 2, 1     Go to 4 But methinks this is tantamount to getting several large carpets to cover up the many small ones already hiding large piles of dust and litter swept under them. Apologies to Nick, Russ, Eric, et al.  for (perhaps) being too flip here.   I respect the earnestness and the information content that is in the discussion, despite the difficulty in finding any convergence. Carry On! - Steve

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org