On 22 Sep 2012, at 20:05, Stephen P. King wrote:
With comp, all the exists comes from the ExP(x) use in
arithmetic, and their arithmetical epistemological version, like
[]Ex[]P(x), or []Ex[]P(x), etc.
Can not you see, Bruno, that this stipulation makes existence
contingent upon
On 22.09.2012 22:49 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/22/2012 6:29 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 22.09.2012 14:58 Bruno Marchal said the following:
...
It is part of what a machine is that we cannot know what we are
doing in building them, so human might as well build a conscious
machine
On 22 Sep 2012, at 22:10, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/22/2012 7:32 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
How could mathematics be fiction ?
If so, then we could simply say that 2+2=5 because it's saturday.
How could we have a world we many minds can, on rare occasions, come
to complete agreement if that
On 22 Sep 2012, at 15:29, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 22.09.2012 14:58 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 21 Sep 2012, at 21:27, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 19.09.2012 00:57 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/17/2012 11:27 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Do you mean that the meaning in a guided
This is my schema.
Can you complete/ammend it?
Things in themselves (noumena) - - Have a computational nature (Bruno) :
few components: numbers, + *
- Is just a
mathematical manyfold(Me), few components: equations
Hi Craig Weinberg
Yes, time and space have to be together to be in spacetime.
This is just basic astrophysics.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/23/2012
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:55:35 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Sep 2012, at 17:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 9:10:30 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 21 Sep 2012, at 22:48, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Post from my blog:
Simple as that, really.
Hi Roger,
My hypothesis is that the grouping of space and time together is a function
of the exterior public realism view, not a primitive reality. The bigger
picture is that while quantitatively seamless, time and space are
(obviously) experientially perpendicular qualities. Astrophysics
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 3:53 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
wrote:
If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers Absent Qualia, Fading
Qualia, Dancing Qualia You should have a look at it first.
I confess I
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Phenomena are the how physical processes appear to our senses.
So they are appearances, not the processes themselves.
But scientific experiments and measurements are not
made on the appearances, they are made on the
processes. Thus the appearences areor [phenomena
are said to
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 8:01:14 AM UTC-4, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
wrote:
Nothing would work except the ontological primitive that I use (sense).
Glad that works for you. Linguistically I am flexible
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 1:54:11 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers Absent Qualia, Fading
Qualia, Dancing Qualia You should have a look at
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 9:06:55 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Phenomena are the how physical processes appear to our senses.
So they are appearances, not the processes themselves.
But scientific experiments and measurements are not
made on the appearances, they
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 9:08:14 AM UTC-4, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
wrote:
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 8:01:14 AM UTC-4, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
wrote:
Nothing would work except the
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
What I see that he has not considered is that consciousness is a the
function of uniqueness itself, and propagates through time as experience,
not as as a product of mechanism. It's qualities are accessed and focused
On 9/23/2012 3:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Sep 2012, at 22:10, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/22/2012 7:32 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
How could mathematics be fiction ?
If so, then we could simply say that 2+2=5 because it's saturday.
How could we have a world we many minds can, on rare
On 23 Sep 2012, at 09:31, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 22.09.2012 22:49 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/22/2012 6:29 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 22.09.2012 14:58 Bruno Marchal said the following:
...
It is part of what a machine is that we cannot know what we are
doing in building them,
On 9/23/2012 6:18 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
This is my schema.
Can you complete/ammend it?
Things in themselves (noumena) - - Have a computational nature
(Bruno) : few components: numbers, + *
- Is just a
mathematical manyfold(Me),
On 23.09.2012 15:05 Roger Clough said the following:
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Phenomena are the how physical processes appear to our senses. So
they are appearances, not the processes themselves. But scientific
experiments and measurements are not made on the appearances, they
are made on the
On 23 Sep 2012, at 12:18, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
This is my schema.
Can you complete/ammend it?
Things in themselves (noumena) - - Have a computational nature
(Bruno) : few components: numbers, + *
OK, for the chosen basic ontology. Numbers, and theor additive and
multiplicative
On 22 Sep 2012, at 23:04, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/22/2012 10:53 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
wrote:
If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers Absent Qualia,
Fading Qualia, Dancing Qualia You should have a look at it
On 23 Sep 2012, at 15:05, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Phenomena are the how physical processes appear to our senses.
So they are appearances, not the processes themselves.
But scientific experiments and measurements are not
made on the appearances, they are made on the
processes.
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
What I see that he has not considered is that consciousness is a the
function of uniqueness itself
For me to understand what you mean by this you need to answer one question,
was the Email message that you sent to the
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
We have very often dismissed emotion
Nothing mysterious about emotion, its just a condition that predisposes a
computer or a human to behave in one way rather than another.
feelings and consciousness in human.
On 23.09.2012 16:51 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 23 Sep 2012, at 09:31, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 22.09.2012 22:49 meekerdb said the following:
...
In the past, Bruno has said that a machine that understands
transfinite induction will be conscious. But being conscious
and
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
mind can also operate on brain (through the will or an intention). I have
no idea at the present of what such a monadic structure might be like.
Will or Intention is a high level description as is pressure, but it's not
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:52:40 AM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
What I see that he has not considered is that consciousness is a the
function of uniqueness itself
For me to understand what you
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:32:51 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Bruno Marchal mar...@ulb.ac.bejavascript:
wrote:
We have very often dismissed emotion
Nothing mysterious about emotion, its just a condition that predisposes a
computer or a human to
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:28:49 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 23 Sep 2012, at 15:05, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Phenomena are the how physical processes appear to our senses.
So they are appearances, not the processes themselves.
But scientific
Roger, no matter how hard I tried: here is my reply;
is your material world THE reality? I think it is our figment of our
changing levels of a developing mentlity. Do you really believe that all
those additional items we learned over the past millennia are products of
an ideal(?) world?
(Btw I
30 matches
Mail list logo
