I´m very sorry John for my though response. But there are a lot of things
to consider in the case and to extract a phrase from its context is not
fair play. Just that.
2013/9/8 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
Feyerabend made the best analysis of the endavour of Galileo in his fight
for
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, September 8, 2013 4:42:02 PM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote:
Sent from my iPad
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 chris peck chris_...@hotmail.com wrote:
Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a
I think that there are real progress that can be even measured in terms of
entropic order. That a man embodies more structure and organization than a
bacteria is objective and measurable, and it is a product of more emergent
levels of evolution. In concrete the human being includes the eucariotic
Hi Alberto,
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that there are real progress that can be even measured in terms of
entropic order. That a man embodies more structure and organization than a
bacteria is objective and measurable, and it is a
PD: Yesterday I saw an advertising in a wall: Metaphysical Tarot, call
(number)
2013/9/9 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
John:
I have been working in AI and I can say you that such indetermination in
the concepts is very common when software designers create their semantic
networks,
Telmo:
I don´t know if that process of emergence of levels is the sole effect of a
darwinian process. We can't know it. what is clear is that Darwinism has a
explanation for it. And this applies too to the social level.
http://www.cogsci.msu.edu/DSS/2006-2007/Wilson/Rethinking_July_20.pdf
On 08 Sep 2013, at 22:39, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Feyerabend made the best analysis of the endavour of Galileo in his
fight for the truth. No other presented the intellectual work of
Galileo in his gigantic intelectual dimension that was, more even
than the case of Einstenin and
On 09 Sep 2013, at 04:10, chris peck wrote:
Hi John
Nearly a century ago J.B.S. Haldane was confronted with a
bonehead who said he thought Evolution was not a scientific theory
because he was unable to provide a hypothetical way it could be
disproved. In response Haldane thundered
On 09 Sep 2013, at 11:58, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Alberto,
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think that there are real progress that can be even measured in
terms of
entropic order. That a man embodies more structure and organization
than a
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
Telmo:
I don´t know if that process of emergence of levels is the sole effect of a
darwinian process. We can't know it. what is clear is that Darwinism has a
explanation for it. And this applies too to the social
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 09 Sep 2013, at 11:58, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Alberto,
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think that there are real progress that can be even measured in terms
of
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I do not like very much Feyerabend, and disgaree with its overal
philosophy of science, I do agree with him on Galileo.
OK so let me get this straight, you agree that the church at the time of
Galileo was much more
Hi PGC
It seems to me that John has just misunderstood Feyerabend. Unsuprising given
his misunderstanding of Popper not to mention Darwin.
Feyerabend is not really defending the church here. Hes making the point that
in order to get his theory out and give it life Galileo had to at some stage
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:42 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I do not like very much Feyerabend, and disgaree with its overal
philosophy of science, I do agree with him on Galileo.
OK so let me get this
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:37 PM, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.comwrote:
Hi PGC
It seems to me that John has just misunderstood Feyerabend. Unsuprising
given his misunderstanding of Popper not to mention Darwin.
Feyerabend is not really defending the church here. Hes making the point
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 11:58:37AM +0200, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Alberto,
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think that there are real progress that can be even measured in terms of
entropic order. That a man embodies more structure and
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 05:26:02PM +0200, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
However a darwinian process is a natural process. In a block universe, there
is no such darwinian process (because there is no process of any kind
On Thursday, September 5, 2013, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My position would suggest that the more mechanistic the conditions of the
test, the more it stacks the test in favor of not being able to tell the
difference. If you want to fool someone into thinking an AI is alive, get a
small group
(Resending complete email - trying to do this on a phone.)
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thursday, September 5, 2013, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My position would suggest that the more mechanistic the conditions of the
test, the more it stacks the test in
On Monday, September 9, 2013 11:39:31 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
(Resending complete email - trying to do this on a phone.)
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thursday, September 5, 2013, Craig Weinberg wrote:
My position would suggest that the more
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote:
it seems to me that John has just misunderstood Feyerabend.
It seems to me that the church at the time of Galileo was much more
faithful to reason than Galileo himself leaves little room for
misunderstanding and is as clear as
21 matches
Mail list logo
