Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-18 Thread LizR
On 19 May 2014 12:13, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/18/2014 4:23 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: >>> >>> So do you think there is so

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-18 Thread meekerdb
On 5/18/2014 4:23 PM, LizR wrote: On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote: On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: So do you thi

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-18 Thread ghibbsa
On Monday, May 19, 2014 12:23:58 AM UTC+1, Liz R wrote: > > On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb > wrote: > >> On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb >wrote: >> >>> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: >>> >>> So do you think there is some merit in Kauff

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-18 Thread LizR
On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: >> >> So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you >> think it is possible to reason about "the Voi

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-17 Thread freqflyer07281972
I looked up Norm Levitt in Wikipedia -- the entry is rather sketchy. Do you have any links or biblio entries I can follow up on? From what I did read of him (opposing "new left" academic silliness) I am intrigued to find out more. On Friday, May 16, 2014 7:05:59 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 5

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-16 Thread meekerdb
On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote: On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you think it is possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-16 Thread LizR
On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: > > So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you > think it is possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful? Or useful? > > > Sure, it's possible to reason about anything. Whet

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 May 2014, at 06:18, LizR wrote: "We have proved that the Void is One, because it certainly is not Many." Is there no possibility that the void might be None? Not really. Not a void you can be conscious one or refer too. Well, set theory obeys comprhension, but also reflection, whic

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread meekerdb
On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you think it is possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful? Or useful? Sure, it's possible to reason about anything. Whether you can arrive at something useful is an open

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread freqflyer07281972
So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you think it is possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful? Or useful? In the article, Kauffman seems to telegraph right at the beginning that everything that will follow is an exercise in deception, thanks to the old Ta

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread meekerdb
On 5/15/2014 9:30 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: I don't get it. Please explain? Are you making a joke, something on the order of "both of these guys are spouting such metaphysical hogwash that the debate between them would be an even bigger yawnfest than their articles in particular"? It was

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread freqflyer07281972
I don't get it. Please explain? Are you making a joke, something on the order of "both of these guys are spouting such metaphysical hogwash that the debate between them would be an even bigger yawnfest than their articles in particular"? Or is it some specific aspect of what each of them profe

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread LizR
"We have proved that the Void is One, because it certainly is not Many." Is there no possibility that the void might be None? On 16 May 2014 15:47, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/15/2014 6:45 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: > >> A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might >> app

Re: Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread meekerdb
On 5/15/2014 6:45 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote: A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might appreciate: http://www.imprint.co.uk/C&HK/vol7/kauffman_7-4.pdf Thoughts? Objections? I can hardly wait to hear the Kauffman vs William Lane Craig debate. Brent -- You rece

Virtual Logic - Formal Arithmetic

2014-05-15 Thread freqflyer07281972
A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might appreciate: http://www.imprint.co.uk/C&HK/vol7/kauffman_7-4.pdf Thoughts? Objections? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and