Re: Downward causation- the correct paradigm for science

Causation is one of those things that is higly context specific. One mans cause is another's incidental factor. Downward and upward causation are two ways of looking at the same thing, serving different modes of explanation. Although, the only downward causation I find believable is anthropic sel

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 5:39 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 2:27 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 5:15 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 1:53 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: Dear Brent, What is it that distinguishes between tokens and propositions? Tokens are the physical elements (e.g. l

Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:25 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Stathis Papaioannou > > Building more complex structures out of simpler ones > by a simple set of rules (or any set of rules) seems to violate the second law > of thermodynamics. Do you have a way around the second law ? > > What you are p

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:31 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 5:21 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 2:03 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 3:05 PM, meekerdb wrote: [SPK] Unless multiple entities can agree that the sequence of symbols "17 is prime" is an indicator of some particular mathe

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:27 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 5:15 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 1:53 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: Dear Brent, What is it that distinguishes between tokens and propositions? Tokens are the physical elements (e.g. letters, words, sounds) that are used to

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 5:21 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 2:03 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 3:05 PM, meekerdb wrote: [SPK] Unless multiple entities can agree that the sequence of symbols "17 is prime" is an indicator of some particular mathematical object and one of its particular prope

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 5:15 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 1:53 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: Dear Brent, What is it that distinguishes between tokens and propositions? Tokens are the physical elements (e.g. letters, words, sounds) that are used to represent a proposition in a particular langua

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:03 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 3:05 PM, meekerdb wrote: [SPK] Unless multiple entities can agree that the sequence of symbols "17 is prime" is an indicator of some particular mathematical object and one of its particular properties, then how does "17 is prime" come

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 1:53 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 2:50 PM, meekerdb wrote: I think you are confusing the tokens "2 = 1+1" with the proposition 2 = 1+1. The former requires someone who understands the notation to interpret it, but the latter is the interpretation, i.e. the concept. A

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 3:05 PM, meekerdb wrote: [SPK] Unless multiple entities can agree that the sequence of symbols "17 is prime" is an indicator of some particular mathematical object and one of its particular properties, then how does "17 is prime" come to mean anything at all? I agree with that.

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: If there were no humans, no human level consciousness, would it still be true that Holmes assistant is Watson? Brent If there there where no humans and no human level consciousness, what meaning would the sentence "It is true that Holmes assistant i

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:50 PM, meekerdb wrote: I think you are confusing the tokens "2 = 1+1" with the proposition 2 = 1+1. The former requires someone who understands the notation to interpret it, but the latter is the interpretation, i.e. the concept. A concept has meaning by definition, otherwise

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:27 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > On 10/30/2012 2:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 11:22 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 2:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 12:5

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 11:00 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Oct

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: My argument is that concepts of truth

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 10:39 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: My argument is that concepts of truth and provability of theorems apply only to the concepts of numbers and their

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > On 10/30/2012 2:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > >> On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King >> >>> On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, m

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 2:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Oct

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > >> On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> My argument is that conc

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 1:43 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: My argument is that concepts of trut

Re: Against Mechanism

2012/10/30 John Clark > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > So you were not answering the question in my post, which can be sum >> up: are you OK with step 3, and what about step 4? >> > > I don't even remember what step 2 was, I found a blunder in your proof so > I didn't find it

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012/10/30 Stephen P. King > On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: > > On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > My argument is that concepts of truth and provability of theorems apply > only to the concepts of numbers and their con

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: My argument is that concepts of truth and provability of theorems apply only to the concepts of numbers and their constructions, not to numbers themselves. Tru

Re: Communicability

On 10/30/2012 12:38 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: We need only to agree on the axioms: x + 0 = x x + s(y) = s(x + y) x *0 = 0 x*s(y) = x*y + x together with some axioms on equality. Dear Bruno, How do you explain the communicability of the meaning of these axioms? You have written words li

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 12:38 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: No? If they do not have something equivalent to concepts, how can they dream? Yes, the universal numbers can have concept. Dear Bruno, Let's start over. Please plain in detail what is a universal number and how it (and not ordinary numbers) ha

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 30 Oct 2012, at 17:04, meekerdb wrote: On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: My argument is that concepts of truth and provability of theorems apply only to the concepts of numbers and their constructions, not to numbers themselves. Truth applies to proposition, or sentences re

Re: Self-ascription and "Perfect Model Model"

On 10/30/2012 4:45 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 29.10.2012 20:44 meekerdb said the following: On 10/29/2012 11:33 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 29.10.2012 19:21 meekerdb said the following: On 10/29/2012 10:21 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Para

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 10/30/2012 4:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: My argument is that concepts of truth and provability of theorems apply only to the concepts of numbers and their constructions, not to numbers themselves. Truth applies to proposition, or sentences representing them for some machine/numbers. If not,

Re: Self-ascription and "Perfect Model Model"

On 30 Oct 2012, at 12:53, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 30.10.2012 11:26 Bruno Marchal said the following: On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:21, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 "Agreed, we cannot demonstrate t

Re: All is well

Hi Roger, On 30 Oct 2012, at 11:41, Roger Clough wrote: The storm has passed and all is well. Luckily Rockville was hardly affected by the storm. My electric power never even went out. I hope everybody else is OK also. Sandy seems impressive, but not that catastrophical, except for the vi

Re: Computationalism -- Leibniz's new paradigm for science

On 30 Oct 2012, at 13:07, Roger Clough wrote: Computationalism and downward causation -- Leibniz's new paradigm for science The new, strictly logical, Leibnizian view of the universe is that the new paradigm- computationalism-- is thoroughly logically based, while conventional science is bas

Re: Computationalism -- Leibniz's new paradigm for science

Roger, Mind and matter can interact if they both contain BECs. Richard On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:07 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Computationalism and downward causation -- Leibniz's new paradigm for > science > > The new, strictly logical, Leibnizian view of the universe is > that the new paradigm-

Computationalism -- Leibniz's new paradigm for science

Computationalism and downward causation -- Leibniz's new paradigm for science The new, strictly logical, Leibnizian view of the universe is that the new paradigm- computationalism-- is thoroughly logically based, while conventional science is based on appearances, not that the appearances are wron

Re: Self-ascription and "Perfect Model Model"

On 30.10.2012 11:26 Bruno Marchal said the following: On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:21, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 "Agreed, we cannot demonstrate that in principle, as a matter of logic, mathematic

Re: Self-ascription and "Perfect Model Model"

On 29.10.2012 20:44 meekerdb said the following: On 10/29/2012 11:33 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 29.10.2012 19:21 meekerdb said the following: On 10/29/2012 10:21 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

On 29 Oct 2012, at 22:38, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/29/2012 1:08 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Oct 2012, at 14:36, Stephen P. King wrote: [Bruno Marchal wrote:] So numbers are universal and can be treated mathematically as always. I agree, but the concept of numbers has no mean

Downward causation- the correct paradigm for science

Downward causation- the correct paradigm for science Leibniz's metaphysics was created in the 17th century to overcome the logical error on which all current science is founded, namely the acceptance that mind and matter can directly interact through effective (upward) causation, although they a

All is well

The storm has passed and all is well. Luckily Rockville was hardly affected by the storm. My electric power never even went out. I hope everybody else is OK also. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/30/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen -- You received

Re: A mirror of the universe.

Hi Roger, Hope everything is fine with Sandy. On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:21, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal I think you're right. Anyway, I've since decided that the numbers have to be simply a priori. Like the pre-established (a priori) Harmony. I am OK with this. Note that it is myster

Re: Self-ascription and "Perfect Model Model"

On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:21, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 "Agreed, we cannot demonstrate that in principle, as a matter of logic, mathematical modeling must inevitably be a distortion of wha

Re: Against Mechanism

On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:58, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> We know that as well as we know anything about physics > This is not valid. NOT A VALID POINT?! Indeed. > A priori we can be dreaming in some world based on a different phys

Re: Scott Aronson on free will

On 10/30/2012 2:46 AM, meekerdb wrote: John Clark should get a kick out of this: http://www.scottaaronson.com/talks/ A Scientifically-Supportable Notion of Free Will In Only 6 Controversial Steps: The Looniest Talk I've Ever Given In My Life : S