Every AI scientist, category theorist or semioticist, and cognitive
psychologist just tries to redo the work of Aristotle or Spinoza with
different names and in a donwgraded way, to fit the fashion prejudices and
the needs of this time, that includes extreme reductionist scientifists
like you.
Time for some philosophy then :)
Here's a paradox that's making me lose sleep:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox
Probably many of you already know about it.
What mostly bothers me is the epistemological crisis that this
introduces. I cannot find a problem with the
In a conference Dennet said that a country with religious soldiers would be
defeated by a country ruled by engineers and economists . the audience
were well trained and educated atheists, but they couldn´t avoid to laugh
loudly at the end of the phrase.
The problem with Dennet and in general
On 11 Sep 2013, at 20:37, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/11/2013 4:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Sep 2013, at 19:45, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/10/2013 1:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Today we know that science proves nothing about reality, but it
can refute theories, and it can provides evidences for
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.comwrote:
In a conference Dennet said that a country with religious soldiers would
be defeated by a country ruled by engineers and economists.
There is certainly some truth in that. Religion can make otherwise sane
people
On 11 Sep 2013, at 21:25, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
My point was just that the verdict against Galileo was rational,
or Popperian.
I don't believe that Karl Popper was as deep a thinker as many on
this list do, but I
On Thursday, September 12, 2013 11:56:12 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Sep 2013, at 11:33, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Time for some philosophy then :)
Here's a paradox that's making me lose sleep:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox
Probably many of you
On 12 Sep 2013, at 11:33, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Time for some philosophy then :)
Here's a paradox that's making me lose sleep:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox
Probably many of you already know about it.
What mostly bothers me is the epistemological crisis that this
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Feyerabend was correct on this (at least).
I ask myself why in the 21'th century would any educated man agree with a
certified jackass like Feyerabend who said the church at the time of
Galileo was much more faithful to
Which reasoning is clearly false?
Here's what I'm thinking:
1) The conclusion I won't be surprised to be hanged Friday if I am not
hanged by Thursday creates another proposition to be surprised about. By
leaving the condition of 'surprise' open ended, it could include being
surprised that the
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Feynman was very bad in philosophy. Even in the philosophy of QM, he has
avoided all questions, and only put in footnote some remarks showing that
he did not believe in the wave collapse. He added often: don't try to
2013/9/12 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.comwrote:
In a conference Dennet said that a country with religious soldiers would
be defeated by a country ruled by engineers and economists.
There is certainly some truth in
On 9/12/2013 2:33 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Time for some philosophy then :)
Here's a paradox that's making me lose sleep:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox
Probably many of you already know about it.
What mostly bothers me is the epistemological crisis that this
On 9/12/2013 3:30 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
In a conference Dennet said that a country with religious soldiers would be defeated by
a country ruled by engineers and economists . the audience were well trained and
educated atheists, but they couldn´t avoid to laugh loudly at the end of the
On 9/12/2013 8:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The difference is the following. Some say there is a broken glass, but forbid you to ask
why there is a broken glass?. That is what some materialist, and all physicalist are
doing for the notion of physical universe. They say that we cannot find an
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:18 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 9/12/2013 8:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The difference is the following. Some say there is a broken glass, but
forbid you to ask why there is a broken glass?. That is what some
materialist, and all physicalist are
On 9/12/2013 6:42 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:18 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 9/12/2013 8:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The difference is the following. Some say there is a broken glass, but
forbid you
to
17 matches
Mail list logo
