Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Jason Resch
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 23/06/2016 3:04 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 21 Jun 2016, at 04:08, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On 21/06/2016 3:14 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 20 Jun 2016, at 04:00, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On 20/06/2016

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Brent Meeker
On 6/19/2016 7:00 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 20/06/2016 4:09 am, Brent Meeker wrote: On 6/19/2016 10:10 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: To ask for that explanation to also somehow encompass the experience itself is both incoherent, and an illegitimate use of the word 'explanation'." Of course.

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Jason Resch
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 6:12 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 Jason Resch wrote: > > ​> ​ >> Would you say other physical universes are possible having completely >> different physical laws and without atoms and molecules as we know them

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Bruce Kellett
On 23/06/2016 3:04 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 21 Jun 2016, at 04:08, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 21/06/2016 3:14 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 20 Jun 2016, at 04:00, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 20/06/2016 4:09 am, Brent Meeker wrote: The alternative, which Bruno actually suggested once but disowns,

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 Jason Resch wrote: ​> ​ > Would you say other physical universes are possible having completely > different physical laws and without atoms and molecules as we know them in > our universe? > ​I would say it would have to have *SOMETHING* physical as

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 John Mikes wrote: Would you care to tell how you define 'life'? > ​No, I would not care to do so..​ > or: 'intelligent behavior'? > ​No. John K Clark​ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Jason Resch
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 4:35 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > ​>> ​ >>> mathematics is the best language for describing physics, but the point >>> is mathematics is a *language* >>> *​ *​ >>> and >>> ​ ​

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Telmo Menezes
> For every sentence about how intelligent behavior works there are a thousand > about how consciousness works because theorizing about consciousness is many > orders of magnitude easier than theorizing about intelligence due to the > fact that intelligence theories actually have to perform while

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread John Mikes
JKC wrote: -- Atoms are more fundamental than molecules but molecules have properties than atoms don't have, and molecules are more fundamental than life but life has properties that molecules don't have; in the same way consciousness needs intelligent behavior and

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​ >> mathematics is the best language for describing physics, but the point is >> mathematics is a *language* >> *​ *​ >> and >> ​ ​ >> physics isn't, physics just *is*. > > > ​> ​ > I give an example, with arithmetic.

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 21 Jun 2016, at 03:08, John Clark wrote: ​JKC Wrote:​ ​Is ??? really the floor or does ??? need an explanation too? John Mikes​ Wrote:​ ​ JKC: why do you think your ??? is T H E FLOOR? ​???​ ​> ​there may be innumerable lower levels... we just don't have the brains to think

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 21 Jun 2016, at 04:08, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 21/06/2016 3:14 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 20 Jun 2016, at 04:00, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 20/06/2016 4:09 am, Brent Meeker wrote: The alternative, which Bruno actually suggested once but disowns, is for explanations to form a "virtuous

Re: Aristotle the Nitwit

2016-06-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 21 Jun 2016, at 18:29, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Jason Resch wrote: ​> ​Bruno has shown that arithmetic is a viable candidate for explaining physics: ​Bruno wasn't​ ​the first to discover that,​ ​people have​ ​known for​ ​400 years​

Re: 9 remarks on absolute idealism 2.0

2016-06-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 21 Jun 2016, at 23:18, Telmo Menezes wrote (to Peter Sas): I think it's quite clear you're a fellow neo-platonist :) No doubt :) Your ideas touch many things that have been discussed on this mailing list throughout the years, especially Bruno Marchal's ideas. You diverge in many ways