On 16 Apr 2010, at 19:07, Brent Meeker wrote:
I think intelligence in the context of a particular world requires
acting within that world. Humans learn language starting with
ostensive definition: (pointing) There that's a chair. Sit in
it. That's what it's for. Move it where you
On Apr 15, 11:21 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I agree with the above and pushing the idea further has led me to the
conclusion that intelligence is only relative to an environment. If you
consider Hume's argument that induction cannot be justified - yet it is
the basis of
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On 4/15/2010 8:01 PM, rexallen...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's assume that our best scientific theories tell us something
true about the way the world *really* is, in an ontological sense.
And further, for simplicity,
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:01 PM, rexallen...@gmail.com
rexallen...@gmail.com wrote:
What would make universes with honest initial conditions + causal laws
more probable than deceptive ones? For every honest universe
On Apr 16, 4:02 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 16 Apr 2010, at 05:01, rexallen...@gmail.com wrote:
What would make universes with honest initial conditions + causal laws
more probable than deceptive ones? For every honest universe it would
seem possible to have an infinite
On Apr 16, 6:29 am, Skeletori sami.per...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 16, 6:01 am, rexallen...@gmail.com rexallen...@gmail.com
wrote:
What would make universes with honest initial conditions + causal laws
more probable than deceptive ones? For every honest universe it would
seem possible
6 matches
Mail list logo
