Re: Dreams and Machines

Brent Meeker wrote: > Brian Tenneson wrote: > >> Hi Brent, >> >>> You are asserting monism. But the One, the ur-stuff, is >>> ineffable/unknowable. >>> So when we place ourselves in the world it is by making distinctions within >>> the >>> unity. To become distinct from the background

Re: Dreams and Machines

Brian Tenneson wrote: > Hi Brent, >> You are asserting monism. But the One, the ur-stuff, is >> ineffable/unknowable. >> So when we place ourselves in the world it is by making distinctions within >> the >> unity. To become distinct from the background (the One) is what it means to >> be >

Re: Dreams and Machines

Hi Brent, > You are asserting monism. But the One, the ur-stuff, is > ineffable/unknowable. > So when we place ourselves in the world it is by making distinctions within > the > unity. To become distinct from the background (the One) is what it means to > be > RITSIAR. Right? > > Brent >

Re: Dreams and Machines

David Nyman wrote: > 2009/7/23 Brent Meeker : > >> If I understand you correctly, this is similar to the explication of "I" by >> Thomas Metzinger in his book "The Ego Tunnel". He expresses it as the self >> being transparent. We look *through* it but not *at* it, and necessarily so. > > Well,

Re: The seven step series

m.a. wrote: > *Going a step further... (see below)* > ** > - Original Message - > From: "Brent Meeker" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 12:57 PM > Subject: Re: The seven step series > > > > > m.a. wrot

Re: Seven Step Series

Bruno, See desperate questions below. marty a. - Original Message - From: "Bruno Marchal" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 11:01 AM Subject: Re: Dreams and Machines >> >> Ah..., I should have written

Re: The seven step series

Going a step further... (see below) - Original Message - From: "Brent Meeker" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 12:57 PM Subject: Re: The seven step series > > m.a. wrote: >> Hi Brent, >> I really appreciate the help and I hate to impose on >> your patience but...(s

Re: Dreams and Machines

2009/7/23 Brent Meeker : > If I understand you correctly, this is similar to the explication of "I" by > Thomas Metzinger in his book "The Ego Tunnel". He expresses it as the self > being transparent. We look *through* it but not *at* it, and necessarily so. Well, I haven't read it, but yes, w

Re: Dreams and Machines

David Nyman wrote: > 2009/7/22 Bruno Marchal : > >>> explanatory redundancy. Hence I'm a monist (or a non-dualist) who - >>> given the singular incorrigibility of first-person 'experiential >>> reality' - concludes that though whatever underlies remains forever >>> *unknowable* it must nonethele

Re: Dreams and Machines

2009/7/22 Bruno Marchal : >> explanatory redundancy. Hence I'm a monist (or a non-dualist) who - >> given the singular incorrigibility of first-person 'experiential >> reality' - concludes that though whatever underlies remains forever >> *unknowable* it must nonetheless perforce be 'real in the

Re: Dreams and Machines

On 22 Jul 2009, at 17:56, David Nyman wrote: > > 2009/7/19 Rex Allen : > >> In your view, Bruno (or David, or anyone else who has an opinion), >> what kinds of things actually "exist"? What does it mean to say that >> something "exists"? > > This is naturally the $64k question for this list - o

Re: The seven step series

m.a. wrote: > Hi Brent, > I really appreciate the help and I hate to impose on > your patience but...(see below) > > - Original Message - > From: "Brent Meeker" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, July 21,

Re: The seven step series

Marty, Brent wrote: On 21 Jul 2009, at 23:24, Brent Meeker wrote: > > Take all strings of length 2 > 00 01 10 11 > Make two copies of each > 00 00 01 01 10 10 11 11 > Add a 0 to the first and a 1 to the second > 000

Re: Dreams and Machines

On 22 July, 16:01, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Ma connection at home is again functioning. I am happy to have solved   > the problem rather quickly. > > On 22 Jul 2009, at 13:54, David Nyman wrote: > > > > > 2009/7/22 Bruno Marchal : > You thought you could make fun of the poor disconnected one? D

Re: Dreams and Machines

2009/7/19 Rex Allen : > In your view, Bruno (or David, or anyone else who has an opinion), > what kinds of things actually "exist"? What does it mean to say that > something "exists"? This is naturally the $64k question for this list - or any other, for that matter (pun intended). I don't know

Re: Dreams and Machines

On 22 Jul 2009, at 14:12, Torgny Tholerus wrote: >> >> >>The most general form of existence is: All mathematical possible >>universes exist. Our universe is one of those mathematical >> possible >>existing universes. >> >> >> This is non sense. Proof: see UDA. Or interrupt me when yo

Re: Dreams and Machines

Ma connection at home is again functioning. I am happy to have solved the problem rather quickly. On 22 Jul 2009, at 13:54, David Nyman wrote: > > 2009/7/22 Bruno Marchal : > >> Ma connection at home is no functioning. > > As a linguistic aside, Bruno has cleverly expressed the above > state

Re: The seven step series

Hi Brent, I really appreciate the help and I hate to impose on your patience but...(see below) - Original Message - From: "Brent Meeker" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 5:24 PM Subject: Re: The seven step series > > Take all strings of length 2 > 00 01

Re: Dreams and Machines

Bruno Marchal skrev: > Le 22-juil.-09, à 10:27, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : > > > Rex Allen skrev: > > Brent: > > Do these mathematical objects "really" exist? I'd say they > have > logico-mathematical existence, not the same existence as >

Re: Dreams and Machines

2009/7/22 Bruno Marchal : > Ma connection at home is no functioning. As a linguistic aside, Bruno has cleverly expressed the above statement in perfect Glaswegian (i.e. the spoken tongue of Glasgow, Scotland - my home town). Other well-known examples are: "Is'arra marra on yer barra Clarra?" (Is

Re: Dreams and Machines

Hi, Ma connection at home is no functioning. So I am temporarily disconnected. I hope I will be able to solve that problem. I am sending here some little comments from my office. I include some more material for Kim and Marty, and others, just to think about, in case I remain disconnected for

Re: Dreams and Machines

Rex Allen skrev: > Brent, > > So my first draft addressed many of the points you made, but it that > email got too big and sprawling I thought. > > So I've focused on what seems to me like the key passage from your > post. If you think there was some other point that I should have > addressed, le

Re: Dreams and Machines

Rex Allen wrote: > Brent, > > So my first draft addressed many of the points you made, but it that > email got too big and sprawling I thought. > > So I've focused on what seems to me like the key passage from your > post. If you think there was some other point that I should have > addressed,