Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 6 Jul 2019, at 16:17, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Saturday, July 6, 2019 at 8:48:42 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > ... the "Löbian machine" idea can not help anyone understand anything. > > > "Löbian machines" (or "theorem provers") are a key technology at MIRI [ >

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 6 Jul 2019, at 15:48, John Clark wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 12:19 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: >> >>> Science guarantee that we cannot be certain that compuytaionalism is >> >>> true, > >> It makes no difference if it's true or not, > > > It makes the

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Saturday, July 6, 2019 at 8:48:42 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > ... the "Löbian machine" idea can not help anyone understand anything. > >> >> "Löbian machines" (or "theorem provers") are a key technology at MIRI [ http://intelligence.org ]:

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 12:19 PM Bruno Marchal wrote: > *>>> Science guarantee that we cannot be certain that compuytaionalism is >>> true,* >> >> >> It makes no difference if it's true or not, > > > *> It makes the difference between surviving a clinical operation and > dying.* > You're atoms

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 3 Jul 2019, at 18:58, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, July 2, 2019 at 5:27:53 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > A brick does not resonate the word “brick”. Of course (as the double indentation indicate), I am not the author of that sentence, and some brick can be

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 3 Jul 2019, at 16:26, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 6:27 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> Science can guarantee that the new brain transplant operation you're about > >> to have today will be no different from the brain transplant operation you

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Wednesday, July 3, 2019 at 11:58:32 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, July 2, 2019 at 5:27:53 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> >> A brick does not resonate the word “brick”. >> >> >> Bruno >> >> >> > But a brain can resonate the word "brain", and "brick". > > > > Genesis

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Tuesday, July 2, 2019 at 5:27:53 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > A brick does not resonate the word “brick”. > > > Bruno > > > But a brain can resonate the word "brain", and "brick". Genesis 2: The Lord God formed a man[a] from the *dust of the ground *... and formed out of the

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 6:27 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Science can guarantee that the new brain transplant operation you're >> about to have today will be no different from the brain transplant operation >> you already had > > > *> Science guarantee that we cannot be certain that

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Tuesday, July 2, 2019 at 5:20:33 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 1:32 AM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > *> Physics (language) could be replaced by computer code* > > > But the computer won't be replaced by computer code, software is useless > without hardware. > > John K

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 2 Jul 2019, at 12:26, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > Le mar. 2 juil. 2019 à 12:20, John Clark > a écrit : > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 1:32 AM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > Physics (language) could be replaced by computer code > >

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 2 Jul 2019, at 00:10, John Clark wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:25 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> We CAN know that, we know it through direct experience, we just can't > >> derive it from existing axioms which means we need to add it as a new > >>

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

Le mar. 2 juil. 2019 à 12:20, John Clark a écrit : > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 1:32 AM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > *> Physics (language) could be replaced by computer code* > > > But the computer won't be replaced by computer code, software is useless > without hardware. > > John K Clark > What

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 1:32 AM Philip Thrift wrote: *> Physics (language) could be replaced by computer code* But the computer won't be replaced by computer code, software is useless without hardware. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 5:10:39 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:25 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> We CAN know that, we know it through direct experience, we just can't >>> derive it from existing axioms which means we need to add it as a new axiom. >> >> >> >

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:25 PM Bruno Marchal wrote: >> We CAN know that, we know it through direct experience, we just can't >> derive it from existing axioms which means we need to add it as a new axiom. > > > > > *We can only know that we are conscious right now, * > Obviously, nobody knows

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 28 Jun 2019, at 15:36, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:24 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> There are 2 fundamental questions and we already know the answers to both. > 1) Question: Is Mechanism as defined by you true? >Answer: Yes. > > > ?

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:24 PM Bruno Marchal wrote: >> There are 2 fundamental questions and we already know the answers to >> both. >> 1) Question: Is Mechanism as defined by you true? >>Answer: Yes. > > > *> ?* > *Hmm… we cannot know that,* > Incorrect. We CAN know that, we know it

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 26 Jun 2019, at 14:37, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 3:31 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: >> >>> No problem with “reasonable”. My point is that mechanism, nor my >> >>> consciousness in two seconds, or the consciousness of another people, is >> >>>

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 3:31 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > *>>> No problem with “reasonable”. My point is that mechanism, nor my >>> consciousness in two seconds, or the consciousness of another people, is >>> not something provable,* >> >> >> True but irrelevant if you're trying to decide what to

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 25 Jun 2019, at 07:09, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > > "Feyerabend felt that science started as a liberating movement, but over time > it had become increasingly dogmatic and rigid, and therefore had become > increasingly an ideology and despite its successes science had started to >

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 25 Jun 2019, at 02:42, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:22 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> The atoms in my brain HAVE been replaced and yet I know for a FACT I have > >> survived; I don't know for a fact that the same is true for you but I >

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

"Feyerabend felt that science started as a liberating movement, but over time it had become increasingly dogmatic and rigid, and therefore had become increasingly an ideology and despite its successes science had started to attain some oppressive features, and it was not possible [any

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:22 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> The atoms in my brain HAVE been replaced and yet I know for a *FACT* I >> have survived; I *don't* know for a fact that the same is true for you >> but I think it's reasonable to assume it is. > > > *> No problem with “reasonable”. My

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

I think one could be most on the mark by calling this "how bad money chases out good money." I joined this list last fall, and in the last couple of months it seems to have fallen over to various humbugs promoting nonsense. these threads of late have degenerated into pure rubbish, bad thinking

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 3:22:45 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > Keep in mind that by “non provable” I mean “need to be assumed” for > proving …. Even the tautologies are not all provable. You need to assume > some axioms and/or rules. > > > All proofs are spoofs. [ Reincarnating

Re: Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

> On 23 Jun 2019, at 17:45, John Clark wrote: > > I changed the title of this thread, I don't even know what the old one means. > > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 8:31 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > > the natural transplant you mention might be the result of an analog, > >

Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

I changed the title of this thread, I don't even know what the old one means. On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 8:31 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > *the natural transplant you mention might be the result of an analog, > continuous process. *It would make a difference if all the decimals plays > a role in