On 12/15/2012 9:43 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/15/2012 5:51 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If you have a group of people getting rich while other people are in bondage to them
and stay poor, that presents a problem for social mobility - which is being realized
now as the US has fallen beneath
On 06 Dec 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
OK, after thinking it over, it seems there's two ways of thinking
about L's metaphysics.
1) (My way) The Idealist way, that being L's metaphysics as is.
2) (Your way) The atheist/materialist way, that being the usual
On 06 Dec 2012, at 18:58, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
The 1p is not left out. Eventually comp singles out eight person
points of
view. If you think comp left out the person, you miss the meaning
of the
comp hope, or
On 14 Dec 2012, at 22:44, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/14/2012 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Dec 2012, at 16:50, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
My prejudice is that the projection from dreams of the mind is
to a
On 15 Dec 2012, at 04:25, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/14/2012 6:07 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/14/2012 2:19 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/14/2012 4:50 PM, meekerdb wrote:
Brent Meeker appreciates John Clark's concern with pronouns. I
think it needs to put in the context of QM, which
On 14 Dec 2012, at 13:06, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) If there is an ultimate truth, the only one we can understand is
in words.
With the CTM that might make sense, but a priori this is not obvious.
2) Words are man-made objects.
No. With the CTM the ultimate truth is
On 14 Dec 2012, at 16:38, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 13 Dec 2012, at 22:21, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/13/2012 2:48 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:33 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
Hi Roger,
Man has no purpose (wise or foolish, it doesn't matter) in life ?
He has evolved, hasn't he ? So man is at least one example of
purpose driving or enhancing evolution.
Purpose is a human construct. DNA encodes the developmental process (or
algorithm) for our brain. This
Hi Craig Weinberg
I believe that life and consciousness and intelligence are inseparable
because none can act without the others being involved.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/15/2012
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following
On 14 Dec 2012, at 21:54, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
In the 3p-view. But with the Computationalist Theory of Mind (CTM,
alias comp), there are two first person points of view
Yes, Bruno Marchal has said that many times
On 15 Dec 2012, at 00:07, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/14/2012 2:19 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/14/2012 4:50 PM, meekerdb wrote:
Brent Meeker appreciates John Clark's concern with pronouns. I
think it needs to put in the context of QM, which is what Bruno is
proposing to explain.
On 15 Dec 2012, at 00:09, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/14/2012 2:19 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Brent,
I stopped a long time ago to read the 'transported' versions for
one reason:
if it is REALLY (only) a transport, it does not make a difference
whether you will CONTINUE in Moscow or in Helsinki, it
Hi Bruno Marchal
I probably agree, but what is the primitive
physical universe ?
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/16/2012
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Pardon my ignorance, but what is Dt ?
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/16/2012
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-12-16, 04:47:59
On 16 Dec 2012, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 7:09 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Conservatives indeed generally resist most
(but not all) change because the changes
are emotionally based rather than logically based,
and so often do more harm than good.
And waste money.
Hi Bruno Marchal
Arithmetic truth ? Perhaps to a mathematician, and it might
be useful along the way, but as a pragmatist, and a
human being, I submit that the only truth that we can
use is one whose meaning we correctly understand.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/16/2012
Forever is
Hi Craig Weinberg
Ultimately we can arrive at a better society,
but ultimately we will all be broke. Look
at europe.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/16/2012
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig
On 16 Dec 2012, at 07:20, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/15/2012 6:41 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 10:37 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Dear Craig,
All of these points are instances of taking a particular
evaluational frame, making it absolute, and issuing judgements
from it. It is
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 7:15:02 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
I believe that life and consciousness and intelligence are inseparable
because none can act without the others being involved.
Sense - biological quality sense (life) - animal quality sense (animal
life)
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:20:09 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
No, I meant you are imputing guilt on me.
I understand, but I am saying that nobody is responsible for their feelings
of guilt but themselves. Try it out. 'You are a really crummy person for
stealing that
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:58:21 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Ultimately we can arrive at a better society,
but ultimately we will all be broke. Look
at europe.
If we don't arrive at a better society, we'll all be in debt and sick.
Craig
[Roger Clough],
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:53:19 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Dec 2012, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 7:09 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Conservatives indeed generally resist most
(but not all) change because the changes
are emotionally
On 16 Dec 2012, at 14:48, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
I probably agree, but what is the primitive
physical universe ?
Any conception of the physical universe in case you assume its
existence in the TOE (explicitly or implicity).
A non primitive physical universe is a physical
On 16 Dec 2012, at 14:54, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Arithmetic truth ? Perhaps to a mathematician, and it might
be useful along the way, but as a pragmatist, and a
human being, I submit that the only truth that we can
use is one whose meaning we correctly understand.
OK? Then it
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 1:55:07 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 12:48 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Yeah, but we happen to be siting in the 21st century using the
knowledge that has accumulated by science and so forth to pass judgement on
people that did not
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:36:55 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Are monads tokens ? I'm going to say yes, because each monad
refers to a corporeal body as a whole (so it is nonreductive at the
physical end)
even though each monad, being specific about what it refers to,
identifies the
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
It is the infinities you need to say always NO to the doctor despite each
year he lowers the level of its digital brains. I can understand you say no
to the doctor who proposes you a 16K brain-computer, but why saying no
On 16 Dec 2012, at 17:22, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
It is the infinities you need to say always NO to the doctor
despite each
year he lowers the level of its digital brains. I can understand
you say no
to the doctor who
On 12/16/2012 3:29 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 9:43 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/15/2012 5:51 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If you have a group of people getting rich while other people are in
bondage to them and stay poor, that presents a problem for social
mobility - which is being
On 12/16/2012 4:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2012, at 18:58, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
The 1p is not left out. Eventually comp singles out eight person
points of
view. If you think comp left out the person, you
On 12/16/2012 5:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
[BM] Everett already show that such relative probabilities does not
depend on the choice of the basis, nor on my place in the multiverse.
[SPK] I strongly disagree with this statement! Everett showed the
exact opposite; that relative
On 12/15/2012 10:06 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
OK, we now have good enough reasons to reeducate them people. Are you trying to be
a guard at that camp that I might possibly need to bribe? I grew up as a son of Bible
Thumpers.
So did I. I've noticed that conservatives and libertarians are
On 12/15/2012 10:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
I guess preventing women from learning to read is good in Afghanistan, even though
it's bad here. So it's rational when you agree with the conclusion and rationalization
when you don't.
Brent
No, it is not! Where are people in power in
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 7:34 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
it's true that after the duplication there will be 2 first person
Bruno Marchal points of view, but the problem is that before the
duplication there is only one first person point of view at it is here the
question is
On 12/15/2012 10:55 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Try this. Consider a number of cities in the US that have been governed by
predominantly Progressive policies and compare then, apples to apples, to a number
cities that have been governed Conservatively with one stipulation: that Progressive
On 12/16/2012 1:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
OK, after thinking it over, it seems there's two ways of thinking
about L's metaphysics.
1) (My way) The Idealist way, that being L's metaphysics as is.
2) (Your way) The
On 12/16/2012 9:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Arguments from unreal hypotheticals are always fallacious.
If the hypothetical are effectively real, they would not be hypothetical.
Q.E.D.
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On 12/16/2012 2:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
No. With the CTM the ultimate truth is arithmetical truth, and we cannot really define
it (with the CTM). We can approximate it in less obvious ontologies, like second order
logic, set theory, etc. But with CTM this does not really define it.
Don't
On 12/16/2012 9:49 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My standard comment is that the Democrats will say that they are
going to do good things and not do them while Republicans will do
bad things and then say that they are good.
Hi Craig,
To me it boils down to a willingness to be
On 12/16/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 10:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
I guess preventing women from learning to read is good in
Afghanistan, even though it's bad here. So it's rational when you
agree with the conclusion and rationalization when you don't.
Brent
No,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/16/2012 1:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
OK, after thinking it over, it seems there's two ways of thinking
about L's metaphysics.
1) (My way) The
On 12/16/2012 2:00 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 10:55 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Try this. Consider a number of cities in the US that have been
governed by predominantly Progressive policies and compare then,
apples to apples, to a number cities that have been governed
Conservatively
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:47:54 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 10:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
I guess preventing women from learning to read is good in Afghanistan,
even though it's bad here. So it's rational when you
The assumption here is that Oliver Stone is presenting verifiable history,
rather then his own, Neo-marxist Theory of history. That the Third World (an
invented word of the Left) is deserving of deep respect, and is presumed
blameless in all things, as well. I notice the avoidance of blaming
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:19:54 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
The assumption here is that Oliver Stone is presenting verifiable history,
rather then his own, Neo-marxist Theory of history. That the Third World
(an invented word of the Left) is deserving of deep respect, and is
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/16/2012 1:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Dec 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
OK, after thinking it over,
On 12/16/2012 11:31 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 9:49 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My standard comment is that the Democrats will say that they are going to
do good
things and not do them while Republicans will do bad things and then say
that they
are good.
Hi Craig,
On 12/16/2012 3:05 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:47:54 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 10:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
I guess preventing women from learning to read is good in
Afghanistan,
On 12/16/2012 3:19 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
The assumption here is that Oliver Stone is presenting verifiable
history, rather then his own, Neo-marxist Theory of history. That
the Third World (an invented word of the Left) is deserving of deep
respect, and is presumed blameless in all
On 12/16/2012 3:41 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:19:54 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
The assumption here is that Oliver Stone is presenting verifiable
history, rather then his own, Neo-marxist Theory of history.
That the Third World (an invented word
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:16:51 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 3:05 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:47:54 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/15/2012 10:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 3:53 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/16/2012 11:31 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 9:49 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My standard comment is that the Democrats will say that they are
going to do good things and not do them while Republicans will
do bad things and then
On 12/16/2012 4:28 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
OH, I get it! The fact that I am born in the US makes me guilty of
a crime for which I must pay restitution. Nice! What a nice con.
Get people to believe that they owe you money and then sit back
and collect checks. Sweet!
Just
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 6:44:11 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 4:28 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
OH, I get it! The fact that I am born in the US makes me guilty of a
crime for which I must pay restitution. Nice! What a nice con. Get people
to believe that they owe
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:22:30 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 3:41 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:19:54 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
The assumption here is that Oliver Stone is presenting verifiable
history, rather then his
On 12/16/2012 7:18 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 6:44:11 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 4:28 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
OH, I get it! The fact that I am born in the US makes me
guilty of a crime for which I must pay restitution.
On 12/16/2012 7:27 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What about all of the other possible theories of history?
This series isn't a theory, it's just recent US history focusing on
the deeper background of the people involved. He shows how even the
generals disagreed with Truman that dropping
Hi Richard,
I believe in the one god of CTM and its (X Z) logically derived
string theory that is omnipotent (contains and carries out the laws of
physics),
When people claim that an entity is omnipotent, they are generally implying
intentionality on the part of the entity.
omniscient
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 7:36:35 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 7:18 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 6:44:11 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 4:28 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
OH, I get it! The fact that I am born in the
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:02:49 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 7:27 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What about all of the other possible theories of history?
This series isn't a theory, it's just recent US history focusing on the
deeper background of the people
On 12/16/2012 8:57 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Richard,
I believe in the one god of CTM and its (X Z) logically derived
string theory that is omnipotent (contains and carries out the laws of
physics),
When people claim that an entity is omnipotent, they are generally implying
On 12/17/2012 12:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 7:36:35 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/16/2012 7:18 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, December 16, 2012 6:44:11 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King
wrote:
On 12/16/2012 4:28 PM, Craig
On 12/17/2012 12:27 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My point is that there is no such a thing as an objective account
of history.
Of course. Oliver Stone pretty much says that too.
Any account of the history of the world, where many people and
things are involved in many processes
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:44 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/16/2012 8:57 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Richard,
I believe in the one god of CTM and its (X Z) logically derived
string theory that is omnipotent (contains and carries out the laws of
physics),
When people
On 12/16/2012 9:59 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:44 AM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/16/2012 8:57 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Richard,
I believe in the one god of CTM and its (X Z) logically derived
string theory that is omnipotent (contains and carries
65 matches
Mail list logo
