Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory
Hi Stephen P. King Many thanks, Stephan ! I should have known it before, but double-aspect and/or dual-aspect theories of mind aren't afraid of using the word subjectivity. Now all they have to do is find out who or what is the subjectr of subjectivity ! Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-04, 09:14:20 Subject: A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ3Z-Y99wW0 -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory
Along the theme of a dual-aspect theory of reality, I recommend the book Mind and Cosmos:Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Nagel, Thomas. It actually has little to do with Darwin but rather discusses how consciousness, cognition, etc. cannot not be explained by materialism. Richard On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Many thanks, Stephan ! I should have known it before, but double-aspect and/or dual-aspect theories of mind aren't afraid of using the word subjectivity. Now all they have to do is find out who or what is the subjectr of subjectivity ! Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-04, 09:14:20 Subject: A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ3Z-Y99wW0 -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory
Hi Richard, Stephen, Roger, Dual aspect theories are plausibly incompatible with comp. In that sense Craig is more coherent, but Stephen, and Chalmers, seems not. They avoid the comp necessary reformulation of the mind-body problem. It is still Aristotle theory variants, unaware of the first person indeterminacy. It might be compatible with comp, but then this asks for a non trivial derivation, and some conspiracy of the numbers. Bruno On 05 Oct 2012, at 13:15, Richard Ruquist wrote: Along the theme of a dual-aspect theory of reality, I recommend the book Mind and Cosmos:Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Nagel, Thomas. It actually has little to do with Darwin but rather discusses how consciousness, cognition, etc. cannot not be explained by materialism. Richard On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Many thanks, Stephan ! I should have known it before, but double-aspect and/or dual-aspect theories of mind aren't afraid of using the word subjectivity. Now all they have to do is find out who or what is the subjectr of subjectivity ! Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-04, 09:14:20 Subject: A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ3Z-Y99wW0 -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything- l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything- l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory
On 10/5/2012 12:24 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net mailto:rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Many thanks, Stephan ! I should have known it before, but double-aspect and/or dual-aspect theories of mind aren't afraid of using the word subjectivity. Now all they have to do is find out who or what is the subjectr of subjectivity ! Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net mailto:rclo...@verizon.net 10/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-04, 09:14:20 Subject: A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ3Z-Y99wW0 -- Onward! Stephen From the video Software of course, has no subjectivity I dunno, when my computer crashes its synonymous to I have crashed when the error is displayed. So in a sense, it asserts and perceives its own crash, and if I can get to the log, I can see more specifically what might have gone wrong, since the system is so complex, that I can be pretty sure that no programmer predicted specifically this particular kind of crash + how to optimize things if/when possible after such. Also, the video speaks of psilocin to make the argument that descriptions of neural activity are not their experience, as Craig might say. Ironically enough, I would bet that the makers of this video have NEVER tried psilocin or related compounds, as they make a later statement in regards to subjectivity in animals One side of the correlation is unknowable, as the scientist cannot be the animal. This stands in direct opposition to subjective experience of DMT-related psychedelic experience, where it is relatively commonplace to find experiential reports of people communicating with plants, animals, and in the case of strong Ayahuasca dosages becoming the animal subjectively. And the argument against that's just brain distortion/hallucination with no scientific usefulness is laid out, in a bit of a dated fashion, by Cosmic Serpent by Jeremy Narby. He takes the position, that indigenous people in South America could not have amassed so many natural remedies and herbal cures (that big pharma has been exploiting so strongly, that every biologist is now suspected to be a bandit, re-drafting laws of sample taking and demonizing biologists from the west campaigns) without using DMT or some related plant-based compound to aid in finding cures. He asks the reader how convincing it is that for hundreds of generations, the indigenous are finding these remedies out of the vast set of toxic and plants irrelevant to human purposes, by systematically applying trial and error? He offers other routes towards this knowledge and sees parallels between genetics, DNA, and indigenous descriptions of plant spirits to investigate how indigenous people find, out of millions of different plant species, exactly the right one, at the right dosage level, over and over again. Of course, there must be some trial and error + dying, but his list of precise hits is quite extensive. He suggests modestly, that the plants subjectivity is accessible through psilocin or DMT related experiences, or the indigenous people are just extremely lucky that their hallucinations line-up with so many effective herbs, roots etc. But this isn't needed: my plants tell me the rhythm at which they need water, and if they're not doing to well, I can tell that subjectively, they're not doing that well. And as time passes I get better in interpreting WHY they are not feeling so well. I'm not so good a listener; but as a musician, I have to make noise, so my plants are patient, I hope. And you don't need psilocin to make these types of communication, but it would probably help :) m Hi Cowboy! I have had first hand experience of altered states and I agree with your points here 100%. Roger's question remains in force: What is it that the subjectr of the subjective? I conjecture that it is the equivalent of a center of mass for the information/immaterial dual aspect of the body. This requires that there is something equivalent to the necessary requirements of a fixed point: some kind of set, closure of that set, a transformation of the set and compactness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-point_theorems_in_infinite-dimensional_spaces -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory
Hi Stephen, Yeah, I was wandering there a bit. Just still not used to the irony of altered states being used in an argument that leaves unsaid the elephant in the room. But I guess if we want something with set and point, this might also be your cup of tea, if you're not already familiar with it, and you permit empty sets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHS7fy-HJxUfeature=relmfu For PDFs: http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjaved=0CCEQFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F0810.4339ei=NiVvUNOTJaKZ0QXl-ICwCAusg=AFQjCNGQqvmeh3wBbDPrSdZIDLHQ3U0wJwsig2=x8yxlI44JMU-T-4RwMTO-g http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=4ved=0CDYQFjADurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.yale.edu%2Fpublications%2Ftechreports%2Ftr1419.pdfei=NiVvUNOTJaKZ0QXl-ICwCAusg=AFQjCNGDlbsWmV2EE6KMcr-L4mL2FMcw2Asig2=n2F1bfhQk3NTRk_cOL2S_gcad=rja I think to Bruno, this would be too rich already. Mark On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote: On 10/5/2012 12:24 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Many thanks, Stephan ! I should have known it before, but double-aspect and/or dual-aspect theories of mind aren't afraid of using the word subjectivity. Now all they have to do is find out who or what is the subjectr of subjectivity ! Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-04, 09:14:20 Subject: A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ3Z-Y99wW0 -- Onward! Stephen From the video Software of course, has no subjectivity I dunno, when my computer crashes its synonymous to I have crashed when the error is displayed. So in a sense, it asserts and perceives its own crash, and if I can get to the log, I can see more specifically what might have gone wrong, since the system is so complex, that I can be pretty sure that no programmer predicted specifically this particular kind of crash + how to optimize things if/when possible after such. Also, the video speaks of psilocin to make the argument that descriptions of neural activity are not their experience, as Craig might say. Ironically enough, I would bet that the makers of this video have NEVER tried psilocin or related compounds, as they make a later statement in regards to subjectivity in animals One side of the correlation is unknowable, as the scientist cannot be the animal. This stands in direct opposition to subjective experience of DMT-related psychedelic experience, where it is relatively commonplace to find experiential reports of people communicating with plants, animals, and in the case of strong Ayahuasca dosages becoming the animal subjectively. And the argument against that's just brain distortion/hallucination with no scientific usefulness is laid out, in a bit of a dated fashion, by Cosmic Serpent by Jeremy Narby. He takes the position, that indigenous people in South America could not have amassed so many natural remedies and herbal cures (that big pharma has been exploiting so strongly, that every biologist is now suspected to be a bandit, re-drafting laws of sample taking and demonizing biologists from the west campaigns) without using DMT or some related plant-based compound to aid in finding cures. He asks the reader how convincing it is that for hundreds of generations, the indigenous are finding these remedies out of the vast set of toxic and plants irrelevant to human purposes, by systematically applying trial and error? He offers other routes towards this knowledge and sees parallels between genetics, DNA, and indigenous descriptions of plant spirits to investigate how indigenous people find, out of millions of different plant species, exactly the right one, at the right dosage level, over and over again. Of course, there must be some trial and error + dying, but his list of precise hits is quite extensive. He suggests modestly, that the plants subjectivity is accessible through psilocin or DMT related experiences, or the indigenous people are just extremely lucky that their hallucinations line-up with so many effective herbs, roots etc. But this isn't needed: my plants tell me the rhythm at which they need water, and if they're not doing to well, I can tell that subjectively, they're not doing that well. And as time passes I get better in interpreting WHY they are not feeling so well. I'm not so good a listener; but as a musician, I have to make noise, so my plants are patient, I hope. And you don't need psilocin to make these types of communication, but it would probably help :) m Hi Cowboy! I have had first hand experience of altered states and I agree with your points here 100%. Roger's question remains
Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussing the dual aspect theory
On 10/5/2012 2:41 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: Hi Stephen, Yeah, I was wandering there a bit. Just still not used to the irony of altered states being used in an argument that leaves unsaid the elephant in the room. But I guess if we want something with set and point, this might also be your cup of tea, if you're not already familiar with it, and you permit empty sets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHS7fy-HJxUfeature=relmfu Hi Mark, Non Well founded sets? Oh yeah! I have been signing their praises for a long time! I especially like all of Jon Barwise http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Barwise's work on them. It is exactly where we can formally model self-representation and allows for a nice finite model of the mereology of infinite sets (if we add a cut-off requirement). For PDFs: http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjaved=0CCEQFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F0810.4339ei=NiVvUNOTJaKZ0QXl-ICwCAusg=AFQjCNGQqvmeh3wBbDPrSdZIDLHQ3U0wJwsig2=x8yxlI44JMU-T-4RwMTO-g http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=4ved=0CDYQFjADurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.yale.edu%2Fpublications%2Ftechreports%2Ftr1419.pdfei=NiVvUNOTJaKZ0QXl-ICwCAusg=AFQjCNGDlbsWmV2EE6KMcr-L4mL2FMcw2Asig2=n2F1bfhQk3NTRk_cOL2S_gcad=rja I think to Bruno, this would be too rich already. Mark I am trying to get Bruno to see the importance of a cut-off but that would require that he admit that comp has an error in step 8. This error can be fixed by a weakening of universality but he wants nothing to do with this suggestion. :_( -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
