Leibniz's theory of perception and consciousness.
Leibniz's theory of perception and consciousness. The secret of perception. Particular minds and how they relate to the overall or Cosmic Mind The problem of perception in materialistic thinking is that it forces us to think that there is a fleshly homunculus inside our brains. Leibniz has a more complicated understanding of particular minds and how they relate to Cosmic Mind. In Leibniz's metaphysics, there is only one mind (the Perceiver or Cosmic Mind or God or the One) that perceives and acts, doing this through the Supreme (most dominant) monad. It perceives the whole universe with perfect clarity. Only it can perceive and act, because its monads (which includes our minds) have no windows. The monads (our minds) perceive only indirectly, as the Supreme Monad is the only --what we would call-- conscious mind. We only think and perceive indirectly, as the Supreme Monad continually and instantly updates its universe of monads. Thus there is no problem communing with God (the Cosmic Mind , the One) as we do so continually and necessarily, although only according to our own abilities and perspectives . That we ourselves, not God (or Cosmic Mind, the One), appear to be the perceiver is thus only apparent. Also, because Cosmic Mind sees the entire universe as viewed by a kaleidoscope of individual monads, the perceptions it returns to us contains not only what we see (the universe from our own individual perspectives) but the perceptions of all of the other monads. Thus each monad knows everything in the universe, but only from its own perspective, and monads being monads, not perfectly clear but distorted. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How the banks are stealing our wealth
How the banks are stealing our wealth. This seems to be factual, and is non-politcal. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0Hi - Roger Clough You'll need to watch it at least twice to understand it, it's very complicated. And scarey. Pass it on. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Beware of the bitcoin
The bitcoin is an international speculative cyber-currency (based on nothing) that has been inflating rapidly in price. I would be wary of investing in it because it can drop in value just as fast as it is rising. It's probably a bubble. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHVu626uOGE Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
You can order Augason Farms 30 day supply of food from Walmart online at
Hi You can order Augason Farms 30 day emergency supply of food from Walmart online at http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?search_query=Augason%20Farmadid=224211189655wmlspartner=wmtlabswl0=3536268310wl1=ewl2=walmart%20augason%20farmswl3=15081448341veh=sem Free shipping, they will deliver to your door. Will keep for 25 years. Usually 99$ but now on sale at $89 each. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Order now, as prices are rising on emergency food supply. Fw: You can order Augason Farms 30 day supply of food from Walmart onlineat
Order now, as prices are rising on this emergency food supply. Subject: You can order Augason Farms 30 day supply of food from Walmart onlineat Hi You can order Augason Farms 30 day emergency supply of food from Walmart online at http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?search_query=Augason%20Farmadid=224211189655wmlspartner=wmtlabswl0=3536268310wl1=ewl2=walmart%20augason%20farmswl3=15081448341veh=sem Free shipping, they will deliver to your door. Will keep for 25 years. Usually 99$ but now on sale at $89 each. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Order now, as prices are rising on this emergency food supply.
Order now, as prices are rising on this emergency food supply. Subject: You can order Augason Farms 30 day supply of food from Walmart onlineat Hi You can order Augason Farms 30 day emergency supply of food from Walmart online at http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?search_query=Augason%20Farmadid=224211189655wmlspartner=wmtlabswl0=3536268310wl1=ewl2=walmart%20augason%20farmswl3=15081448341veh=sem Free shipping, they will deliver to your door. Will keep for 25 years. Usually 99$ but now on sale at $89 each. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Walmart 30 Day Emergency Food Storage Pail Augason Farms Review
Walmart 30 Day Emergency Food Storage Pail Augason Farms Review Video at- Roger Clough http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRtg5YKddQo $89.00 on sale from $90.00 at walmart. free shipping, order online at http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?search_query=Augason%20Farmadid=224211189655wmlspartner=wmtlabswl0=3536268310wl1=ewl2=walmart%20augason%20farmswl3=15081448341veh=sem Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Global warming ?
Hi Chris, According to the Vostok data, we're in for another ice age, in say 10,000 years or so. jcs-online,theoretical_physics_board,- mindbr...@yahoogroups.com,everything-list,4dworldx Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. attachment: vostok_IceCores1.gif
A great place for hackers to start to be an identity imposter
Hi Hans Dieter Franke A great place for hackers to start to be an identity imposter is www.healthcare.gov (if that's the right address). No or little security. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Auguson Farms emergency food supplies at walmart
Hi In preparation for the coming weimar-type economy collapse, where a loaf of bread will cost you $100 or more, I'm going up to Germantown to buy Auguson Farms emergency food pails at walmart. The 30 day pails of emergency food will keep for 25 years, run from $80 to $160 for 30 days. Maybe 6 months to begin with. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Arctic sea ice increased by 51 % last year.
Hi - Global warming ? Liberals live in a universe of lies. Arctic sea ice increased by 51 % last year. http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/51-growth-in-thick-arctic-ice-over-last-year/ Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
MERRY CHRISTMAS !
MERRY CHRISTMAS ! USAF FLASH MOB at the National Air and Space Museum, Washington DC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIoSga7tZPglist=UUKX86dJGhTOn8NtRUqnATFQ Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
That hateful subject, metaphysics
That hateful subject, metaphysics To deal with consciousness and experiences, which are mental, not physical, you have to go to that hateful subject, metaphysics, and only Leibniz has a good account of the perceiver, which is the experiencer not available to materialism. If you still believe there is a perceiver in materialism, could you tell us where it is ? It has to be at one place, as your experience and mine says that there is only one perceiver. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz on sensory experience (my account)
Leibniz on sensory experience Leibniz maintained that all causation is mental. This appears to contradict sensory experiences such as being pricked by a pin, for the cause of the experience would seem to originate in the body with the prick. There are a number of resolutions to this apparent dilemma, my own being that the cause of the pain is not the sensory nerve signal itself, but the mental perception of the nerve signal, for the pain is felt mentally by the perceiver, although it may appear to come from the site of the pin prick. So the perceiver is the causal agent, not the body. This is not dissimilar to other bodily events such as the feeling of fear or other emotions. The actual feeling I believe is caused by the mental perception of the fear, which may originate in diffuse regions of the brain or other organs and be perceived from nerve signals from the brain or other bodily sites. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The myth of computer consciousnesss and intelligence
The myth of computer consciousnesss and intelligence People have been trying to create perpetual motion machines for centuries, but nobody has succeeded, I believe because of energy losses. The problem with making computers truly intelligent I believe is also impossible, because the final stage of perception must be subjective (free of symbols), not objective (described in symbols). In particular, Computers can only deal with descriptive knowledge (symbols), which is third person singular, hence, not personal and private, not conscious. The results and the process itself are publicly avalable (as code) and communicable. Only living creatures-- even a gnat--can think without symbols (not coded), since thinking is a conscious experience, hence first person singular (not coded). Since it is personal, it can to some extent be communicated, but there is always a loss converting experience to symbols, expressing in words my expeience, what I thought and concluded, which need not be in symbols. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz vs Jerry Fodor - Is there a language of thought ?
Leibniz and Piccinini versus Jerry Fodor - Is there a language of thought ? 1. Jerry Fodor argues that thoughts have representations, namely that there is a language of thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_of_thought In which, as I understand it, computations are made by the brain presumably semantically using this language in some analogy to a Turing machine. 2. There is an alternate theory of thinking by Gualteiro Piccinini: http://philpapers.org/rec/PICCWR as well as Leibniz, which seems to me to be essentially pragmatic or or perhaps mechanical, not semantic, so not disimilar to Leibniz's theory of perceptions and the following of the pre-established order. Leibniz's theory as well as this theory can seemingly'be used by any biological entity, and in Leibniz's case at least, by non-biological (in the conventional sense) entities. Both of these seem to follow these steps: a) the brain perceives a sensory and b) by some mechanism knows what it perceives (forming a representation, a word that Piccinini rejects) c) which causes it pragmatically to act in an instinctual. learned or otherwise prescribed fashion. Here semantics are replaced by functional (pragmatic) mechanisms. In Leibniz these steps are carried out by the One which in a) converts a sensory into signal into a perception and in b) and c) carries out a prescribed action which biologists might call an instinct and which Leibniz calls a pre-established harmony. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[no subject]
Leibniz and Piccinini versus Jerry Fodor - Is there a language of thought ? 1. Jerry Fodor argues that thoughts have representations, namely that there is a language of thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_of_thought In which, as I understand it, computations are made by the brain presumably semantically using this language in some analogy to a Turing machine. 2. There is an alternate theory of thinking by Gualteiro Piccinini: http://philpapers.org/rec/PICCWR as well as Leibniz, which seems to me to be essentially pragmatic or or perhaps mechanical, not semantic, so not disimilar to Leibniz's theory of perceptions and the following of the pre-established order. Leibniz's theory as well as this theory can seemingly'be used by any biological entity, and in Leibniz's case at least, by non-biological (in the conventional sense) entities. Both of these seem to follow these steps: a) the brain perceives a sensory and b) by some mechanism knows what it perceives (forming a representation, a word that Piccinini rejects) c) which causes it pragmatically to act in an instinctual. learned or otherwise prescribed fashion. Here semantics are replaced by functional (pragmatic) mechanisms. In Leibniz these steps are carried out by the One which in a) converts a sensory into signal into a perception and in b) and c) carries out a prescribed action which biologists might call an instinct and which Leibniz calls a pre-established harmony. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz and Piccinini versus Jerry Fodor - Is there a language of thought ?
Leibniz and Piccinini versus Jerry Fodor - Is there a language of thought ? 1. Jerry Fodor argues that thoughts have representations, namely that there is a language of thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_of_thought In which, as I understand it, computations aremade by the brain presumably semantically using this language in some analogy to a Turing machine. 2. There is an alternate theory of thinking by Gualteiro Piccinini: http://philpapers.org/rec/PICCWR as well as Leibniz, which seems to me to be essentially pragmatic or or perhaps mechanical, not semantic, so not disimilar to Leibniz's theory of perceptions and the following of the pre-established order. Leibniz's theory http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ as well as this theory can seemingly'be used by any biological entity, and in Leibniz's case at least, bynon-biological (in the conventional sense) entities. Both of these seem to follow these steps: a) the brain perceives a sensory signal and b) by some mechanism knowswhat it perceives (forming a representation, a word that Piccinini rejects) c) which causes it pragmatically to act in an instinctual, learned orotherwiseprescribed fashion. Here semantics are replaced by functional (pragmatic) mechanisms. In Leibniz these stepsare carried out by the One which in a) converts a sensory into signal into a perception and in b) and c) carries out a prescribed action which biologists might call an instinct and which Leibniz calls a pre-established harmony. Dr.Roger B CloughNIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Once again. Why science can never understand consciousness.
Once again. Why science can never understand consciousness. Science deals only with public (communicable) knowledge. Descriptive knowledge by the third person. Mind and consciousness are personal (private) knowledge. Personal experience by the first person singular. This is the province only of philosophy. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
In case you didn't get it. Consciousness is not a scientific topic
In case you didn't get it. Consciousness is not a scientific topic Science deals only with public (communicable) knowledge. Descriptive knowledge by the third person. This is the province of science. Mind and consciousness are personal (private) knowledge. Personal experience by the first person singular. This is the province only of philosophy. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Is the universe driven by mathematics or is it driven by aesthetics
Is the universe driven by mathematics or is it driven by aesthetics ? One cannot fail to look upward at the beauty of the night sky without a feeling of wonder. Physicists look for ultimate explanations for the behavior of the universe in mathematics, and indeed one cannot avoid mathematics in describing the physical universe. Many have remarked at the fact that the universe is so intellegible. Indeed, Plato at his academy admonished, Let no-one ignorant of geometry enter here”, for his cosmology of the structure of the universe was based on a series of geometrical forms. Forms. This perhaps suggests, because of the entrance of beautiful forms into Plato's metaphysics, an aesthetic aspect to his cosmology. Similarly, advancing this a step further, while Leibniz was well grounded in mathematics (being a co-discover of the calculus), and was constantly amazed at the geometrical structures in nature, his metaphysics also shaped his thinking due to his a) Principle of Sufficient Reason, in which there is a reason why every aspect of the universe is as it is, and b) the pre-established harmony, the word harmony indicating an aesthetic beyond logic of relations of parts of the universe into his metaphysics. Thus Leibniz viewed the history of the universe as following the metaphysics of a pre-established harmony, ever striving toward a more perfect harmony or beauty. Now beauty appears as a unity in diversity, which I have suggested as moving toward the One from the Many. But others have suggested that the One is just one, not unity in diversity. Leibniz, through his metaphysics, in which the parts are related to the whole, suggests that metaphysics, even aesthetics, rules the universe, not mathematics. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A modern monadology
For those wishing to delve deeper into Leibniz, see A modern monadology http://www.ucl.ac.uk/jonathan-edwards/monadology Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
For those interested in the theory of conscious experience, see
For those interested in the theory of conscious experience, see the excellent site, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/jonathan-edwards Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A definition of human consciousness
A definition of human consciousness Human consciousness is experience by the first person singular. Materialistic theories of consciousness can only describe experience, not deal with experience itself. Actual experience is only available in philosophical Idealism (Kant, Plato, Leibniz). Because only Idealism contains Mind. Materialism and science do not and can not. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Some basic principles of mind - a wakeup call for materialists.
Some basic principles of mind - a wakeup call for materialists. 1. There are two forms of knowledge: a) knowledge by acquaintance, such as you have met Obama, and b) knowledge by description, such as you have been told that Obama is president of the USA. 2. Knowledge by acquaintance is personal knowledge (Michael Polanyi) and is only available to platonists. It is also called knowledge by the first person singular. Knowledge by description is third person knowledge and is available to both platonists and materialists. 3. Analytic philosophy deals only in knowledge by description, so while useful to materialists, is not too useful to deal directly with mind, which uses knowledge by acquaintance. 4. Actual mind is only accessible to platonists, not materialists, because mind deals only with personal knowledge. 5. Consciousness is experience by the first person singular. Since computers can only deal with third person information, they cannot be conscious (or alive). 6. Perception of the world outside is the conversion of incoming incoming sensory nerve signals into mental events. 7. Intelligence is the ability to autonomously make choices. This means that computers, since they can only do what is given to them from outside by a programmer, can have no true intelligence. Actual artificial intelligence is thus impossible. 8. Thinking is any intentional act by the mind. 9. The mind has no necessary connections to the brain. 10. The mind plays the brain like a violin. 11. Life is Mind. The list goes on. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
From Leibniz: gravity is the universal striving toward a more perfect beauty
From Leibniz: gravity is the universal striving toward a more perfect beauty James Collins, in chapter III, section 3 of The Continental Rationalists, [Bruce publishing, 1967] discusses the metaphysics of Leibniz, in particular Leibniz's belief that the universe is striving toward a more perfect harmony, which is unity. In other words, the universe is heading toward the convergence of Plato's Many to Plato's One. You may recall that beauty is the presence of unity in diversity, so this would be a striving toward a more perfect beauty (unity). We so not know that Leibniz actually developed a theory of gravity based on this concept, but it would seem to be a natural observation. This universal convergence also corresponds to Leibniz's theory of universal perception, in which the mental universe is an infinite collection of monads (which range from people to rocks) perceiving each other from their various standpoints, with their perceptions constantly converging via the One toward a face-to-face positioning. Note that all physical interactions in Idealism are actually caused mentally, so that a change in perceptions of monads constitutes a change in positions or other perceived attributes such as shape or temperature as well as mood. The changes are not actually caused by interactions between monads (since being independent, there can be no relations between monads) but are caused by the One in its search for a more perfect harmony or unity. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Dialogue between two believing scientists on how the universe is run
Dialogue between two believing scientists on how the universe is run JOHN-- Funny thought [universal government, which is Plato's universe] coming from a staunch Republican conservative govt minimizer. Perhaps an atheist is just someone who thinks something the size of the whole universe can operate on its own laws without a lot of direct interference? ROGER- According to my understanding of Leibniz and the Bible, after God had created the universe in six days, he wrote a computer program called the pre-established harmony on the seventh to run the universe forever onward and rested. He's still resting. In this program God allowed for free will and knew what we would do but did not cause us to do so. Luther believed that our free will only applied to everyday affairs, but in matters of salvation (good or bad) he chose for us. Note that God is in what Leibniz called the world of necessary logic, which is timeless (eternal), so that knowing before-hand is simply part of God's nature. JOHN ---Also interesting. The universe does indeed seem to operate on some pretty iron-clad laws, and there are some who suspect that perhaps that's because the only way to have a universe that will support/create life is to have almost exactly the laws (and special constants) that govern our universe. ROGER-- That would be the pre-established harmony. Nonliving entities move by deterministic or efficient causation, but life does not operate by such iron-clad laws, it operates by what Aristotle called final causation, which means it is goal-oriented and purposeful. It therefore has to have innate intelligence. JOHN- Personally, although I think the idea of a personal God is important, I do have concerns as to why an omnipotent, universal overseer who has already so cleverly tuned the universe to such perfection would need to continually need to tweak things locally. Seems very much like we need God far more than HE needs us. ROGER - The tweaking is indeed local, but it has already been programmed into the pre-established harmony. JOHN - So, in order to consider a personal God, it seems to me that the real reason for locality is more about how HE wants me to become more like HIS ideal, and is offering opportunities. ROGER- No, we have free will, at least to some extent. JOHN-- Given that HE is out of time and space, that is a pretty neat trick, and I find it highly unlikely that any of HIS creations are at all cognizant of how or why or what HIS purposes are. But, I think the Universe itself is understandable, and probably exists as one of the simplest sets of laws that can work. ROGER-- Out of time and space means in eternity. The world isn't all law-governed (deterministic), for both man and nature have some degree of unpredictability, but this has been pre-programmed into Leibniz's pre-established harmony. JOHN- There is really already a lot of evidence to support that idea. And some evidence to support the idea that our whole universe is a tiny part of everything. Already, it is pretty clear that most people really still have no concept of the scale of our little visible part of our universe, either in time or space. Most never even look up to see that there are actually more stars (and star systems) than there are grains of sand on every beach in our entire world - and that our entire world is less than a dust mote, even within our solar system, much less in the real immensity of space and time. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Bertrand Russell's complete misunderstanding of Plato's theory of knowledge and perception
Bertrand Russell's gross misunderstanding of Plato's theory of knowledge and perception In http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1EiQEwn1lc Plato believed that truth is a conceptual form of knowledge, which is a priori and so not obtained through the senses. Truth obtained through the senses, Plato believed, was changeable. But, presumably because he was an empiricist, Russell essentially treats Plato as an empiricist gone wrong. Russell thus grossly misunderstands Plato, apparently not undestrstanding that, as Leibniz and Kant have stated, there is a difference between necessary or a priori knowledge (which does not change) and the changeable, contingent truths of perception. Because of Russell's apparent confusion between these two forms of knowledge, and denial of a priori knowledge, Russell wastes many words apparently trying to show that the changeable knowledge obtained through the senses can somehow be necessarily true, giving snow is white as an example. Anyone who grew up as I did, in what was then sooty smokey Pittsburgh, knows that snow can sometimes be dark gray. Similarly, Russell incorrectly bases his repudiation of a priori knowledge by using the changeable nature of contingent knowledge as an example. I have not checked Russell's treatment of Kant, but because of this ignorance, Russell also apparently treats Kant as an empiricist gpone bad. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Reality is not matter, it's Heidegger's dasein, which is Leibniz's monad
Reality is not matter, it's Heidegger's dasein, which is Leibniz's monad Materialists spend much effort on trying to show that reality is simply physics. But the philosophy of Plato, Leibniz, Kant, and now Heidegger shows that materialism and analytic philosophy is incomplete, since it omits mind from reality. Leibniz modeled reality as material bodies in the dualism of a monad, which is the corresponding mental being of matter. The matter is in spacetime, the monad is outside of spacetime. Heidegger's dasein is a combination of the german words da, meaning there, and sein meaning being or mental. The da is in spacetime and the sein is outside of spacetime, so a dasein is a monad. Thus Heidegger's universe is essentially the same as Leibniz's, an infinite collection of monads or daseins. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Advaita Vedanta and Leibnizian Metaphysics
Advaita Vedanta and Leibnizian Metaphysics This is a huge, daunting subject which I can only scratch the surface of. A book or PhD thesis could easily be written on it and do a much better job than I can here. Keep in mind also that I am not an expert on Advaita. A brief summary of the Advaita Vedanta is given at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta#Philosophy ' Advaita (Sanskrit: not-two) refers to the identity of the true Self, Atman, which is pure consciousness and the highest Reality, Brahman, which is also pure consciousness. Followers seek liberation/release by acquiring vidya (knowledge) of the identity of Atman and Brahman. Attaining this liberation takes a long preparation and training under the guidance of a guru. ' Here we will only roughly compare the metaphysics of Leibniz with that of the Advaita, not the religious aspects of Advaita. Both are essentially Idealist. In general, Brahman, being the highest Reality, corresponds to Plato's One, the Creator, but Brahman has many more aspects than Plato's One, which I leave to other scholars to elucidate. Atman corresponds roughly to Leibniz's monad for a person. The relation of a person's monad (which I will call Self, which is what Leibniz calls a person's spirit,l meaning the conventional soul) ) to Plato's One (Leibniz's rough correspondence to Brahman) is similar to Advaita's goal of unity or Advaita between Atman and Brahman, but this is not a fixed goal in Leibniz, it happens at a rapid pace in rapid sequential steps in Leibniz in everyday perception and action, in which the Self is a passive slave to the One, its master. So in Leibniz there is never a complete fusion of Self and the One as desired in Advaita, The One is the active agent in periodic communion with the One much like a shepherd with his sheep. In Leibniz there is imperfect communion of the Self with other selves, which Christianity calls the 'communion of the saints'. By imperfect is meant that as in all human perception, there is some distortion to various degrees, depending on the person, which limits the range of inter-communion with other saints and the environment. Salvation is not clearly defined in Leibniz, as far asI have been able to find out, but certainly communion of the Self and the One is found pleasurable and enlightening. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Some basic principles of Leibniz's Idealism
Some basic principles of Leibniz's Idealism 1. Everything that exists has two aspects, essence (mind or monad) and existent (object). This is a localized version of Berkeley's overall Idealism. Essence, being mental, is outside of spacetime while the existent (a corporeal body) is inside of spacetime. 2. Essence is the subjective or mental aspect of existence, which in turn is objective and physical (in spacetime). For example. consciousness or experience is the mental aspect of physical sensory nerve signals. 3. Essence creates, perceives and controls existence. For example, essence is what causes a struck ball to follow Newton's law of motion. For example, tje mind controls the brain. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A conjecture- Quantum physics, Relativity and Leibniz's Idealism
A conjecture: Quantum physics, Relativity and Leibniz's Idealism According to Leibniz's Idealism, everything that exists has two aspects, 1, essence (mind or monad or what we here conjecture is a quantum wave), which is outside of spacetime, and 2. existent (physical particle or object), which is inside of spacetime. This is a localized version of Berkeley's overall Idealism and amounts to the Principle of Complementariy, that everything is a wavicle. Essence, being mental, is outside of spacetime and might be thought of as the quantum wave. while the existent (a corporeal body) is inside of spacetime and follows particle physics and relativity. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How can a grown man be an atheist ?
How can a grown man be an atheist ? An atheist is a person who believes that the universe can function without some form of government. How silly. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How can a grown man be an atheist ?
How can a grown man be an atheist ? An atheist is a person who believes that the universe can function without some form of government. How silly. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Online opinions of Dennett and Chalmers-- the clueless two
Online opinions of Dennett and Chalmers-- the clueless two Dennett never tells us what conscilousness is, because conciouness rwequires a perceiver, and he hasn't a clue as to what that is, because that concept is foreign to his materialism. He's clueless. And famous as well maybe because with that beard he looks like a philosopher ought to look. Chalmers is in the same hole as Dennett is he is also a materialist wuithout a perceiver. With his long wild hair he may seem to some to know what he's talking about. But he's also clueless, which is why we have the hard problem of consciousnwess Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough gh --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Berkeley and Leibniz- where the monads came from
Berkeley and Leibniz- where the monads came from In Berkeley's philosophy of idealism, a subject is needed to perceive objects, otherwise they could not exist. Leibniz got around the problem of what happens if nobody's there (a tree falls in a wood...) by dividing up the world into physical objects and assigning a subject (a monad) to each object. This everything is conscious to some extent. Otherwise it could not follow the pre-established harmony. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
Why consciousness is not possible in materialism Two related definitions of consciousness are: 1. Consciousness is experience by the first person singular. 2. Consciousness is self-referential awareness. So consciousness requires that there be a self, or first person singular, to be aware. There is however no provision in materialism or analytic philoophy for such a self. Therefore materialism cannot explain consciousness. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Russell's abandonment of Leibniz's platonism after his conversion to the cult of materialism
Russell's abandonment of Leibniz's platonism after his conversion to the cult of materialism. Three related definitions of consciousness not possible in materialism or analytic philosophy: 1. Consciousness is experience by the first person singular. 2. Consciousness is self-referential awareness. 3. Consciousness is the acquisition of knowledge by acquaintance. Ironically, the third definition is similar to one of the two forms of knowledge originally proposed by Bertrand Russell, one of the founders of analytic philosophy, which he called knowledge by acquaintance the other being knowledge by description. Knowledge by description is that you know from common knowledge that Obama is president of the United States, while knowledge by acquaintance means that you have met Obama, presumably in the White House. Analytic philosophy deals only with knowledge by description, omitting knowledge by acquaintance, despite Russell's awareness of this type knowledge, so that Russell's omission of knowledge by acquaintance in the philosophy of materialism-- a necessity-- was a deliberate omission from analytic philosophy, no doubt due to Russell's conversion to the semi-religious cult of materialism. This seems to have occurred during the young Russell's writing of The Philosophy of Leibniz, which expertly treats Leibniz's logic, but begins to pull back as he approaches Leibniz's Platonism. which Russell does not seem to have understood very much, much less accepted. Russell then publicly promoted materialism and analytic philosophy, together with the third member of their dark trinity, atheism. The rest is history, as they say, in which this trinity became de rigeour in the halls of official western academe. Meanwhile because of this dark trinity, western philosophy has struggled but failed to explain consciousness. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Perception and cionsciousness according to Leibniz
Perception and consciousness according to Leibniz- The secret of perception. Particular minds and how they relate to the overall or Cosmic Mind The problem of perception in materialistic thinking is that it forces us to think that there is a fleshly homunculus Leibniz has a more complicated understanding of particular minds and how they relate to Cosmic Mind. In Leibniz's metaphysics, there is only one mind (the Perceiver or Cosmic Mind or God) that perceives and acts, doing this through the Surpreme (most dominant) monad. It perceives the whole universe with perfect clarity. Only it can perceive and act, because its monads (which includes our minds) have no windows. The monads (our minds) perceive only indirectly, as the Supreme Monad is the only --what we would call-- conscious mind. We only think and perceive indirectly, as the Supreme Monad continually and instantly updates its universe of monads. Thus there is no problem communing with God (the Cosmic Mind) as we do so continually and necessarily, although only aqccording to our own abilities and perspective. That we ourselves, not God, appear to be the perceiver is thus only apparent. Also, because Cosmic Mind sees the entire universe as viewed by a kaleidoscope of individual monads, the perceptions it returns to us contains not only what we see (the universe from our own individual perspectives) but what the perceptions of all of the other monads. Thus each monad knows everything in the universe, but only from its own perspective, and monads being monads, not perfectly clear but distorted. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
An account of the historical suppression of Leibniz's forbidden knowledge
An account of the historical (and continuing) suppression of Leibniz's forbidden ideas Leibniz was an anti-materialist so that his inclusion of Mind and deity into his philosophy were forbidden ideas, and stillo are, to our detriment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTiztUNrhhM Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The death of analytic philosophy and the birth of consciousness
The death of analytic philosophy and the birth of consciousness Consciousness, which is experience by the first person singular, is by definition outside of the scope of analytic philosophy, which is limited to be able to only deal in descriptions of experience. Definition of ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY a philosophical movement that seeks the solution of philosophical problems in the analysis of propositions or sentences ?alled also philosophical analysis compare ordinary-language philosophy. Analytic (British) philosophy (Bertrand Russell, Anthony Flew. etc.) limits philosophy to word and logic puzzles and thus legitimizes atheism and materialism. This has given rise to a semi-religious cult or atheism and materialism that cannot tell us about experiential human issues such as consciousness, religion, and true ai. Or meaningful issues such as ethics or aesthetics. However, continental philosophy and Indian philosophy can. (Leibniz, Kant, Indian philosophers). Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The passing on of a paradigm--analytic philosophy
The passing on of a paradigm--analytic philosophy Max Planck once said that Science advances one funeral at a time. Thomas Kuhn made a similar conclusion in his magnum opus. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Not to speak ill of the dead, but the champions of analytic philosophy-- the basis of materialism and atheism-- which are cults that have have degenerated Western thought - have passed on or are at an advanced age. Bertram Russell - Died 1970 Donald Davidson - Died 2003 Hilary Putname -- alive but at age 87 - Roger Clough Willard V.O. Quine -- died 2000 Richard Rorty -- Died 2007 J L Austin -- Died 1960 A J Ayer - died 1989 GEM Anscomb - Died 2001 D M Armstrong -- Alive but at age 87 C D Broad Died --1971 What will replace it ? Some suggest pragmatism, which disclaims the ability to arrive at objective truth. There is also marxism, which offers materialism and economics in place of objective truth. I am suggesting that one avenue has been ignored since its origin in the 17th century, owing to the near-religion of materialism. That is the Idealism of Leibniz. Idealism is superkior to materialism in the sense that while materialism and analytic philsophy believe that all that exists is material hence objective. But Leibniz' metaphysics opens the door to the subjective universe, which includes mind and which anyone who can see an object is aware of. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The whole enchilada: Leibniz, the first person, third person, and the brain
The whole enchilada: Leibniz, the first person, third person, and the brain. A new mind-brain model for the post-analytic post-materialist world. [Please feel free to use whatever I have written on the topic of Leibniz to advance your own theory of the mind and brain. All copyrights are released and may be freely used. I am 72 years old and do not need any more publications. -RBC.] We are now in a position of assembling the various parts of a new, comprehensive mind/brain model, incorporating in it what we believe to be the philosophy of the 21st century, that of Leibniz's platonism. As discussed previously, B Russell observed that there are two forms of knowledge, which we can assign to the semi-cerebral model of the brain: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/knowledge/right_left_brain.html a) The left brain metaphor-- This deals with what Russell called knowledge by description. This is the rational doman of analytic philosophy, so it deals in linear sequences. It can also be called the Third Person singular. b) The right brain metaphor-- this is what is left out of the materialist and analytic models of the mind and brain. It is Russell's knoeledge by acquaintance, namely, the world of experience, that of the First Person singular. So it is nonlinear and wholistic. This is hopefuly the new paradigm of the mind and brain which needs further developing by others. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A slight revision- The whole enchilada: Leibniz, the first person, third person, and the brain.
The whole enchilada: Leibniz, the first person, third person, and the brain. A new mind-brain model for the post-analytic post-materialist world. [Please feel free to use whatever I have written on the topic of Leibniz to advance your own theory of the mind and brain. All copyrights are released and may be freely used. I am 72 years old and do not need any more publications. -RBC.] We are now in a position of assembling the various parts of a new, comprehensive mind/brain model, incorporating in it what we believe to be the philosophy of the 21st century, that of Leibniz's platonism. As discussed previously, B Russell observed that there are two forms of knowledge, which we can assign to the hemi-cerebral model of the brain: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/knowledge/right_left_brain.html a) The left brain metaphor-- This deals with what Russell called knowledge by description. This is the rational doman of analytic philosophy, so it deals in linear sequences. It can also be called the Third Person singular. b) The right brain metaphor-- this is what is left out of the materialist and analytic models of the mind and brain. It is Russell's knoeledge by acquaintance, namely, the world of experience, that of perception, comnsciousness, ? that of the First Person singular. It nonlinear and wholistic. This is submitted to all as the new paradigm of the mind and brain which needs further developing by others. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Re: Why computer consciousness and artificial intelligence areimpossible.
Hi Gabriel Bodeen Absolutely. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Gabriel Bodeen Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-11-26, 15:17:20 Subject: Re: Why computer consciousness and artificial intelligence areimpossible. So in the event that somebody actually does make AI, please recall this and consider your philosophical system to have been falsified. -Gabe On Monday, November 25, 2013 6:17:15 AM UTC-6, Roger Clough wrote: Why computer consciousness and artificial intelligence are impossible. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why computer consciousness and artificial intelligence are impossible.
Why computer consciousness and artificial intelligence are impossible. Acccording to Bertrand Russell, there are two types of knowledge: a) Knowledge by description. It is common knowledge that Obama is president. Example: Computer code. Artificial intelligence. Third person singular. b) Knowledge by experience. You have met Obama. Example: Human perception. Human intelligence. First person singular. Computers cannot simulate human activities or experiences or consciousness because they have to deal in code, which consists of instructions or descriptions. Computers cannot deal in knowledge by experience, so they cannot experience, produce experiences, or understand experiences. Thus computer intelligence and artificial intelligence are impossible. Computers deal in code (third person singular). Only people and other living entities can deal in experiences or be conscious (first person singular.) So only humans and other living entities can be conscious or be truly intelligent. Thus artificial intelligence is impossible Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The difference between computer and human perception
The difference between computer and human perception Computer consciousness and perception is by description only, such as 42. Underwater perfection as given below. Human perception is an experience such as shown in the photograph. 42. UNDERWATER PERFECTION Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The difference between computer and human perception
Note that only Idealism such as in Leibniz or Plato or Kant can deal with human perception, because only such Idealism can deal with knowledge by acquaintance (experience) directly, not by description.. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Roger Clough Receiver: - Roger Clough Time: 2013-11-25, 08:00:56 Subject: The difference between computer and human perception The difference between computer and human perception Computer consciousness and perception is by description only, such as 42. Underwater perfection as given below. Human perception is an experience such as shown in the photograph. 42. UNDERWATER PERFECTION Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
ai and atheism
What I find curious is that so much time and vitriol is spent on the web attacking theism, while so much money is spent on ai and computers to simulate humans, when nobody has ever shown or proven that computers can be conscious. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Atheism is wish fuklfillment.
Atheism is wish fulfillment. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Athism is wish fuklfillment.
Athism is wish fulfillment. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Atheism is wish fulfillment
Atheism is wish fulfillment. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why analytic (British) philosophy (Bertrand Russell) has led humanity and ai astray
Analytic (British) philosophy (Bertrand Russell, Anthony Flew. etc.) has led humanity and ai astray, because it limits philosophy to word and logic puzzles. Thus it cannot tell us about experiential human affairs such as consciousness and true ai. However, continental philsophy can. (Leibniz, Kant). Definition of ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY : a philosophical movement that seeks the solution of philosophical problems in the analysis of propositions or sentences ?alled also philosophical analysis compare ordinary-language philosophy Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why analytic philosophers are atheists and materialists
Analytic (British) philosophy (Bertrand Russell, Anthony Flew. etc.) has led humanity and ai astray, because it limits philosophy to word and logic puzzles and thus legitimizes atheism and materialism. Humanity has been sold short because British analytical philosophy cannot tell us about experiential human issues such as consciousness, religiion, and true ai. However, continental philosophy and Indian philosophy can. (Leibniz, Kant, Indian philosophers). Definition of ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY : a philosophical movement that seeks the solution of philosophical problems in the analysis of propositions or sentences ?alled also philosophical analysis compare ordinary-language philosophy Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough DreamMail - New experience in email software www.dreammail.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Pre-established harmony ? Computers programs exhibit pre-established harmony.
Pre-established harmony ? Computers programs exhibit pre-established harmony. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
revised corrected version of Leibniz's imploied dictum, I think, therefore there is an I.
Corrected version of Leibniz's implied dictum- I think, therefore there is an I Although previously I refered to propositional subject:predicate logic in reference to an implied dictum of Leibniz's ? ? think, therefore there is an I?, that is incorrect. The true meaning of Descartes' famous dictum, I think, therefore I am can be better clarified instead by analyzing Leibniz' model of the mental I (essence ) with the physical brain as its existent correlate. The proposition ? think, therefore I am? is a simple intentional act by the mind, a monad, which is the mental essence of subject, not the brain, which is the corresponding physical existent form of the mind. The actual agent of the intention is the mind, not the brain, as the brain cannot perform intentional acts. Here I is the essence or monad of the existent brain, being its agent, so that the I plays the brain in thought much like a violin is played by a violinist. This also answers Heidegger's life-long search for an answer to the question what is being? Being is I am or essence+existence. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Corrected version of Leibniz's implied dictum- I think, therefore
Corrected version of Leibniz's implied dictum- I think, therefore there is an I Although previously I refered to propositional subject:predicate logic in reference to an implied dictum of Leibniz's – “I think, therefore I am”, that is incorrect. The true meaning of Descartes' famous dictum, I think, therefore I am can be better clarified instead by analyzing Leibniz' model of the mental I (essence ) with the physical brain as its existent correlate. The proposition “I think, therefore I am” is a simple intentional act by the mind, a monad, which is the mental essence of subject, not the brain, which is the corresponding physical existent form of the mind. The actual agent of the intention is the mind, not the brain, as the brain cannot perform intentional acts. Here I is the essence or monad of the existent brain, being its agent, so that the I plays the brain in thought much like a violin is played by a violinist. This also answers Heidegger's life-long search for an answer to the question what is being? Being is I am or essence+existence. Dr.Roger B CloughNIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough DreamMail - The first mail software supporting source tracking www.dreammail.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz: I think, therefore there is an I
Leibniz: I think, therefore there is an I The true meaning of Descartes' famous dictum, I think, therefore I am can be clarified further by restating it using Leibniz' model of being (essence+existent) if the proposition is restated as I think, therefore there is an I, or equivalently as I perceive, therefore there is an I, or in fact any proposition containing a the subject I and a verb. Such propositions are simple intentional acts by the mind, not the brain, where I is the essence or monad of the existent brain, which then thinks much as a violin is played by a violinist. This also answers Heidigger's life-long search for an answer to the question what is being? Being is I am or essence+existence. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Spinoza, Leibniz and Descartes on the mind-body problem
Spinoza, Leibniz and Descartes are completely different on the relationship between mind and matter See http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/substance/#DesSpiLei Spinoza was a monist, who believed that mind and matter were one. Descartes believed that mind and matter are totally different Leibniz beleived that mind was a monad or mental aspect of matter. Bertrand Ruseell said that there are two forms of knowing: a) Knowing scientifically or objectively (knowing by description) Example: you know who Obama is from the newspapers. b) Knowing by acquaintance or experience (knowing subjectively) Example: you know who Obama is because you have met him. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The self as lens: Leibniz's lens-like model of perception and reality
The self as lens: Leibniz's lens-like model of perception and reality. Although I cannot find a direct reference in Leibniz's writings, they have not all been translated. Nevertheless Leibniz's model of perception is seemingly based on the high technology of the 17th century, Huygen's microscope. The indirect reference to the perceiver as based on the lens of a microscope, which can represent a field of view at a single point, as a unity,, as a perceiver or self must do Leibniz's conceptioon of reality was similar to this : Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. I do not conceive of any reality at all as without genuine unity. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670) This single point in the perceiver and in reality itself is reflected in Leibniz's monad (which represents the many in the one), Plato's model of the One, the concepts of white and black holes and the twistor in Penrose's physics.. Leibniz's monadology itself can be used to derive the self as lens, since a person can be focused down to be represented by a monad, which cAn be understood as a point homunculus (the perceiver). It is also well known that Leibniz referred to the myriad of microscopic organisms seen in a microscope as vderying his view of the world as the many in the one (the monad). Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
We need to bring Leibniz out of the closet
Hi - Roger Clough All current theories of mind are objective (materialist) since they do not include the first person singular. Consciousness or Mind is nonobjective or subjective, since it is the perceptions by the first person singular. Only Leibniz has a philosophy of mind (subjectivity). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ So we (all welcome) need to bring Leibniz out of the closet. This would revolutionize neurophiolsophy. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why we need to bring Leibniz out of the closet if progress is to be made
Why we need to bring Leibniz out of the closet if progress is to be made Materialism, the philosophy that the universe is made only of matter, and nothing else, is the basic philosophy of science. So Idealism, the philosophy that only ideas, not matter, are real, seems to be a fantasy world. But materialism as a total philosophy, and not idealism, is quite limited. It cannot explain perception consciousness, the overall governance of the universe or of the brain. In order to understand these, hence consciousness, we must follow the pioneering lead of Leibniz, the only relatively modern, logical, and comprehensive Idealist philosopher: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism Thus Bertrand Russell, having written a book on the logic of Leibniz, abandoned Leibniz on his horrfying discovery of the implications of Idealism -- that yet even logically, there can only be a single perceiver and a single governor of the universe. You can't have two kings in a kingdom, nor two perceptions at the same time. So Russell became a materialist, a philosophy that has no provision for experience or the perceptions of the first person singular (which is consciousness). Thus to understand the governance of the universe or consciousness or perception, we must accept Idealism as a valid philosophy overall, while we can still accept materialism as valid within the range of science (the range of matter). But we must let go of any possibility of overall governance. See Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Rupert Sheldrake and animal hyper senstivity to the environment
Hi George K. Lucey Jr. Interesting project. but you need to look at more subtle events. Thunder and lightning even scare me. There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance?hat principle is contempt prior to investigation. ? Herbert Spencer Lightning and thunder scare even me. I would instead look into more subtle indicators or future events, like pets running away away before earthquakes or squirrels gathering nuts before winter, where there might be more quantitative predictors.. 1) Dogs and other animals are also well known to be sensitive to oncoomg earthquakes, presumably through their feet. In addition to more conventional methods, one successful predictor of earthquakes actually uses the number of missing pets in ads in newspapers as a quantitative predictor. Perhaps it is subtle vibrations, or it could be piezoelectricity (electricity produced by stress) that earthquakes are known to emit. 2) Perhaps it is just folklore, but many sources indicate that squirrels are known to be very active hunting for and burying nuts if the forecoming winter is to be severe or long. This has to be some kind of clairvoyance iif it is true. Because of the squirrerls, if true, my own belief is that you may not always find physical causes. I think it is mostly clairvoyace. Rupert Sheldrake has written a book called something like the sense of being stared at from behind. Many people cruelly ridicule him, but he is is not a nut, he is a brave man, going against the cult of materiaism that has locked up scientific opinion. This is called contempt prioor to investigation. If they would repeat his suggested experiments they wouod be amazed. But they are imprisoned by the cult of materialism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/feb/05/rupert-sheldrake-interview-science-delusion I have found after an inspection Leibniz's philosophy that there is a valid reason for this, namely that we can be aware of activities (even in time) outside of our current situation. But I have likewise so far have been met with silence. God bless this brave scientist, silenced by the cult of materialism. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: George K. Lucey Jr. Receiver: Fred Lipscomb,Laszlo Kish,Royce Wist,Roger Clough Time: 2013-11-12, 18:29:51 Subject: Animal help needed I am working on a means of relieving the trauma that some pets suffer when they sense a thunderstorm approaching long before it can be heard and seen by humans. My first inquiry is into dogs that (like any person hit unexpectedly on the back of the neck) suddenly - in clear skies - become disoriented, confused, tremble, and run to hide. My sense is the fear arises from a bombardment of short pulses of infrasonic and magnetic waves coming from different directions due to lightning strikes in storms out of sight and earshot of humans. Clearly the fear grows to pure terror when bright flashes and loud noises are added upon arrival of the thunderstorm overhead. I would like help in discussing theories and solutions with anyone who has owned (or seen) an animal that became neurotic in thunderstorms ... dogs, birds, cats, horses, cows, pigs, whatever. Anyone have a neurotic pet story to tell? Is anyone able to speak about the ferroelectric material, Magnetite, in the body that enables homing pigeons and dogs, etc., to locate their spacial position in the earth's magnetic field? My hypothesis is that magnetic pulses from distant lightning strikes reorients the Magnetite and causes confusion, etc. only in dogs with an abundance of the material.. Giorgio DreamMail - Your mistake not to try it once, but my mistake for your leaving off. use again www.dreammail.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Max Planck on (internet) scientists as atheists
Hi Allen Francom Good for you. Similarly I have been involved in the consciousness market with Leibniz's platonism. But same as you, no reponses, silence. Max Planck had the same problem: Die Wahrheit triumphiert nie, ihre Gegner sterben nur aus. Truth never triumphs , opponents just die out. Science advances one funeral at a time. Under these conditions it is no wonder, that the movement of atheists, which declares religion to be just a deliberate illusion, invented by power-seeking priests, and which has for the pious belief in a higher Power nothing but words of mockery, eagerly makes use of progressive scientific knowledge and in a presumed unity with it, expands in an ever faster pace its disintegrating action on all nations of the earth and on all social levels. I do not need to explain in any more detail that after its victory not only all the most precious treasures of our culture would vanish, but which is even worse also any prospects at a better future. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck Many other great quotes opn that page Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why materialistic theories of consciousness are quackery
Why materialistic theories of consciousness (the science of consciousness) are quackery Bertrand Russell said that there are two forms of knowledge example: you know who Obamn is, he is the US president. a) Knowledge by descriptions (objective knowledge) example: you know who Obamn is, he is the US president. b) Knowledge by acquaintanxce (subjective knowledge) example: you know who Obama is for you have met him. Consciousness is the perceptions of the first person singular (type b), and so is subjective (experiential or type b), while materialist theories of mind do not include the first person singular, so are third person singular or objective (can only describe experiences) and so are of type a) and can only talk about consciousness in descriptive terms. This is not consciousness itself. So any forum calling itslef the Science of Consciousness held biennially at the Universioty of Arizona is fraudulent since there cannot be any science of consciousness. For science is an objective, not subjective. In my opinion only the philosopher Leibniz has given us a subjective theory of mind. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ Such an opinion is captured by another philosopher, Kierkegaard, in one of his works. works, Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragmnents : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concluding_Unscientific_Postscript_to_Philosophical_Fragments The scientist/philosopher Michael Polanyi also touched on this, calling it perswonal knowledge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Polanyi Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis:
How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis: They said, wait a minute. We didn't cause this problem. The govt and the bankers caused ity. So they threw the bankers and other causers of the debt into jail. Hmmm. Sounds tempting. - Roger Clough http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-BJgwWx57U# Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
To understand consciousness, you have to get personal. Otherwise it's hearsay.
Hi Hans, Your mind has been self-limited due to your materialism. Consider this: Bertrand Russell said (correctly) that there are two forms of knowledge: a) knowledge by description (anything in language, impersonal, third person singular, public knowledge, hearsay) This is all that materialism can provide you with. example: you know that Obama is president. b) knowledge by acqaintance ( this is first person singular experience, which is what consciousness is. This is personal and private. Thus it is good evidence in court. Materialism rejects anything personal b) and so will never understand consciousness. example: you have met Obama. While Russell correctly saw those two forms, he apparently never understood, or at some time rejected, b) and became a logical atomist, which finally gave up. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Re: [4DWorldx] Is mass mental or physical ?
Hi Anna Of course. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Anna Receiver: everything-list,- mindbr...@yahoogroups.com,4dworldx,theoretical_physics_board Time: 2013-11-08, 23:52:10 Subject: Re: [4DWorldx] Is mass mental or physical ? First of all, there is no evidence that any strings exist. So, the question of mass is irrelevant, unless for the string theoretician. The theory requires that strings have mass, but where is the proof? Mathematical proof is not enough. Anna From: Roger Clough Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 5:36 AM To: everything-list ; mailto:mindbr...@yahoogroups.com ; 4dworldx ; theoretical_physics_board Subject: [4DWorldx] Is mass mental or physical ? I need some help. Yesterday I made the claim that strings are massless and so are nonphysical (mental, by my definition). But you can show theoretically that strings have mass, based on line tension and other variables. So is mass physical ? Unless I am mistaken, mass is always defined in terms of other variables, much like in a dictionary words are defined in terms of other words.. For example, m = E/c^2, where E is energy and c is the speed of light. But energy is the ability to do work, which in turn is defined as W = F*d, where F is a force moved through distance d. But Force is mass*acceleration. So we are back wihere we started, since m =E/c*2. To me this means that we must empirically define some force like the weight of a selected and saved lump of lead as say a Newton of force, and a length given by some metal rule to be saved, and proceed from there. To me this means that all physical variables are actually nonphysical (theoretical or mental). Which is the basic foundation of idealism or platonism. Everything, even mass, is mental in the sense of being theoretical or mathematical. Is this correct ? Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Consciousness is simply the perceptions of the first person singular, which are not available to materialist philosophy.
Dear Dr. Hameroff, I mean no disrespect, and with my only credential being that of common sense, I would like to suggest that you consider abandoning materialist solutions to the problem of consciousness in your series of seminars on the science of consciousness, for these can never work. This is because consciousness is simply the perceptions by first person singular. But materialist solutions can only give descriptions of consciousness, those of the third person singular. Kant and Plato have partly described the nature of the first person singular, but Leibniz has given us the most complete and logical definition in his platonic theory of perception: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ So I invite you to look into the platonic, not the materialist, solution. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Is mass mental or physical ?
I need some help. Yesterday I made the claim that strings are massless and so are nonphysical (mental, by my definition). But you can show theoretically that strings have mass, based on line tension and other variables. So is mass physical ? Unless I am mistaken, mass is always defined in terms of other variables, much like in a dictionary words are defined in terms of other words.. For example, m = E/c^2, where E is energy and c is the speed of light. But energy is the ability to do work, which in turn is defined as W = F*d, where F is a force moved through distance d. But Force is mass*acceleration. So we are back wihere we started, since m =E/c*2. To me this means that we must empirically define some force like the weight of a selected and saved lump of lead as say a Newton of force, and a length given by some metal rule to be saved, and proceed from there. To me this means that all physical variables are actually nonphysical (theoretical or mental). Which is the basic foundation of idealism or platonism. Everything, even mass, is mental in the sense of being theoretical or mathematical. Is this correct ? Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Re: [Mind and Brain] A definition of existence (being twofold)
Hi Cass Silva I've just posted a note which argues that all physical entities or variables such as mass are theoretical and therefor mental. You might disagree. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Cass Silva Receiver: MindBrain Time: 2013-11-07, 18:49:59 Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] A definition of existence (being twofold) Does Gravity have mass? Cass On Wed, 6/11/13, Roger Clough wrote: Subject: [Mind and Brain] A definition of existence (being twofold) To: mindbr...@yahoogroups.com Cc: everything-list , - mindbr...@yahoogroups.com , theoretical_physics_board Received: Wednesday, 6 November, 2013, 1:21 AM Leibniz said that space, being massless, is a nonphysical nonentity. All that physically exists then consists of physical objects with mass-- these together with their nonphysical mental massless representations (as mind or will, consciousness, monads). Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A clarification: nonphysical mental strings (massless) and physical strings (with mass)
Sorry for so many postings, I'll try to refrain, but this is a critical clarification. Sorry my confusion A clarification: nonphysical mental strings (massless) and physical strings (having actual mass) There are (possibly) physical strings which have mass and strings,as mental entities or monads. They both refer to the same item but that item as referred to in two alternate worlds, one the physical, mass carrying or actual string which refers to a particle with mass and the nonphysical or mental, which is essentially a mental representation or descrption of that sgtring. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz's Platonic Physics
Leibniz's Platonic Physics Leibniz's idealistic or platonic physics seems to me, a nonphysicist, to possibly obviate the need for quantum mechanics due to the preestablished harmony. I apologize for any errors. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-physics/ To partly summarize Leibniz's platonic physics: 1. Leibniz's universe is platonic or mental (Idealism) whose reality consists completely of monads, which are the mental representations (complete logical concepts, ie subjects with a complete set of predicates) of physical bodies. 2. Because of the nature of perception by the One, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ each monad contains the perceptions or states of all of the other monads in the universe. 2.Space and time are not monads, but their effects are representated as a pre-established harmony. essentialy a theory of mental or platonic causation, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-established_harmony This is a mental map of spacetime (which itself is mental) that predicts the paths of all bodies from the beginning of the universe to the end based, on the laws of physics (Newtonian physics and particle physics). 3. Time by itself is not physical, but is, as one might expect in a platonic physics, it is perceived only as an intuition (see Kant also) and as perceived is quantized as the One can see all monads only at particular instances. Space (which does not physically exist) is mental but continuous 4. Causation in Leibniz is platonic, that is to say, completely mental, and simply follows the pattern of the pre-established harmony. In this, a monad at spacetime A (which contains the states of all of the other monads) is perceived by the One and moved to spacetime B (possibly next to A). 5. Since this physics applies to all monads (bodies or particles of any size) and these completely comprise the platonic universe, it could possibly replace quantum mechanics at small scales. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
String theory in Leibniz's platonic physics
String theory in Leibniz's platonic physics Strings, being massless, are Leibniz's monads (mental) in his platonic physics (see below). In platonic physics, each monad is attached to its relevant physical particle, contains information on all of the other monads (strings) in the universe. Interactions between particles are given mentally according to Leibniz's pre-established harmony. Each string or monad also has a bare naked soul which is essentially its identity and perhaps its operating system. Monads are dimensionless truth points in the platonic realm. Leibniz's Platonic Physics Leibniz's idealistic or platonic physics seems to me, a nonphysicist, to possibly obviate the need for quantum mechanics due to the preestablished harmony. I apologize for any errors. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-physics/ To partly summarize Leibniz's platonic physics: 1. Leibniz's universe is platonic or mental (Idealism) whose reality consists completely of monads, which are the mental representations (complete logical concepts, ie subjects with a complete set of predicates) of physical bodies. 2. Because of the nature of perception by the One, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-mind/ each monad contains the perceptions or states of all of the other monads in the universe. 2.Space and time are not monads, but their effects are representated as a pre-established harmony. essentialy a theory of mental or platonic causation, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-established_harmony This is a mental map of spacetime (which itself is mental) that predicts the paths of all bodies from the beginning of the universe to the end based, on the laws of physics (Newtonian physics and particle physics). 3. Time by itself is not physical, but is, as one might expect in a platonic physics, it is perceived only as an intuition (see Kant also) and as perceived is quantized as the One can see all monads only at particular instances. Space (which does not physically exist) is mental but continuous 4. Causation in Leibniz is platonic, that is to say, completely mental, and simply follows the pattern of the pre-established harmony. In this, a monad at spacetime A (which contains the states of all of the other monads) is perceived by the One and moved to spacetime B (possibly next to A). 5. Since this physics applies to all monads (bodies or particles of any size) and these completely comprise the platonic universe, it could possibly replace quantum mechanics at small scales. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Computers, code and consciousness
Computers, code and consciousness Cumputers cannot simulate human activities or experiences or consciousness because they have to deal in code. Code is not magic, have no inherent intelligence. Computers are not magic, they are just machines. Computers can only deal in code, which is impersonal and public. They are noit experiences, but can be descruiptions of experiences, which is not the same thing. Unfortunately, experiences are personal and computers, dealing in code only, have no access to them. Why must I keep explaining this ? Computers deal in code. People don't Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind I am shocked to find that so far I have not found a scientist anywhere that understands that spacetime, being just lawful behavior (laws) is platonic (is mind). Perhaps they consider it to be quantum gravity. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A definition of existence (being twofold)
Leibniz said that space, being massless, is a nonphysical nonentity. All that physically exists then consists of physical objects with mass-- these together with their nonphysical mental massless representations (as mind or will, consciousness, monads). Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Ternary (platonic) perception in Leibniz and Peirce
Ternary (platonic) perception in Leibniz and Peirce In any mental operation, it take 3 to tango. In Leibniz, in perception brainmind operates in 3 stages: A neuron or neurons emit an optical neve signal Raw perception of this signal by the One and converison of this into an image Return of the image to the individual mind And intelligence or thinking requires three entities, as CS Peirce has explained. That which is observed (the object-- the software) That which mechanically observes (the mechanical perceiver-the algorithm to execute the software code) That which determines or understands what is perceived (intelligence---which the computer does not have) This isn't rocket science: You have a text in your hand (Firstness). You read the text (Secondness). You understand what the text means (Thirdness). Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Hi - Roger Clough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Ryle's category mistake and why spacetime, to a platonist, is contained in Mind
Ryle's category mistake and why spacetime, to a platonist, is contained in Mind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_mistake This is a very subtle issue. The term category-mistake was introduced by Gilbert Ryle in his book The Concept of Mind (1949) to remove what he argued to be a confusion over the nature of mind born from Cartesian metaphysics. Ryle alleged that it was a mistake to treat the mind as an object made of an immaterial substance because predications of [actual] substance are not meaningful for a collection [or fiction] of dispositions and capacities. The first example is of a visitor to Oxford. The visitor, upon viewing the colleges and library, reportedly inquired 'but where is the University?' [4] The visitor's mistake is presuming that a University is part of the category units of physical infrastructure or some such thing, rather than the category institutions, say, which are far more abstract and complex conglomerations of buildings, people, procedures, and so on. Ryle, like the eliminative materialists, used this logical error to eliminate mind-- simply as being a fiction. But to a platonist, his argument can produce a completely different conclusion. To a platonist or a solipsist, Mind itself, in which objects exist, is not simply a fiction, it is all that there is (the One). To put it another way, Mind is a necessarily higher order of being in which the physical world exists. Then Mind is not a property of brain, it is a higher order (mental) category in which the physical brain exists. Brain is in spacetime, which itself is contained in Mind. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
What do you do if your Obamacare is too expensive ?
What do you do if your Obamacare is too expensive ? No matter what your age, most people will find Obamacare way too expensive. But there's no penalty for a pre-existing illness. So most people are going to dodge the bullet, take the penalty, and just wait until they get sick. That changes the statistics a great deal, as most people, not just young healthy people as hoped, will similarly dodge the bullet. But presumably all of those penalties will not support Obamacare by a long shot. So I don't see how Obamacare can possibly work. This is not rocket science. What kind of morons designed it ? Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz : What is beyond the spacetime barrier ? Mind.
Leibniz : What is beyond the spacetime barrier ? Mind. Leibniz's Philosophy of Physics http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-physics/ Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Is language learned by inherited primordial or by platonic language structures ?
Hi Dr.d Although he called it inherited primordial language, Chomsky proposed what I would instead call platonic language structures in view of the philosophies of Plato, Kant and Leibniz, this apparent in view of the rapidity at which language can be learned and communicated. Chinese children learning mandarin is truly staggering, if you have ever tried mandarin. I would add memory to the candidate list. This may be persuasive but is not a logical proof. A bit stronger is Rupert Sheldrake's massing of a mountain of data from empirical studies of memory and cognition orf past and shared expeiences. Similarly the highly respected Willard van Orman Quine has described epistemology in my words as quais-magical rather than logical. In my own words, he said that finding the meaning of a sentence happens epistemologically almost as bam, you're there. The platonic view makes understanding language simple, Instead, in my opnion, what I call the cult of materialism has blinded our understanding of the world and man so that platonism (implicit in Plato and Leibniz, but incomplete in Kant) is dismissed out of hand. But platonism is how we perceive and think. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough == -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz's platonism and the false problem of reductionism in mind and quantum theory
Leibniz's platonism and the false problem of reductionism In physics and psychology we have two enigmas if materialism rules, those of spontaneous mental intentions (so that there is no free will) and also that of spontaneous (probabililistic) events such as we find in statistical mechanics and quantum mechanics. But under Leibniz's platonism, these dilemmas vanish. Reductionism is the view that all mental processes can be reduced or explained by brain mechanisms. But true intentions, where physical actions are initiated by the mind, not the brain, obviously fail this test, so it is a puzzle swept under the rug by the cult of materialism. Free will also then disappears and creation is enigmatic. Leibniz's platonism is the inverse view in which all observed or possible brain functions are controlled by mind, so that reductionism vanishes as a problem and the will, with possibly some limitations, is free to create. All causes in Leibniz's world are thoughts. Similarly, if there is no need Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Hello, I thought this might be of interest to you!
A message from Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net. Forget the welfare politics. Redistributing leftover food instead of income. All over the world, activists are working directly to help the poor and hungry by redistributing leftover food to soup kitchens etc. I would think that the govt and the churches could help in these efforts See http://www.npr.org/templates/archives/archive.php?thingId=141123294 Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Paste this link in your browser to visit Food For The Poor today: http://www.foodforthepoor.org/about/contact.html?s_oo=pGhXz2tQtwTO85UGoiCEgQ If you no longer wish to receive email messages sent from your friends on behalf of this organization, please follow the link below: http://support.foodforthepoor.org/site/TellFriendOpt?action=optouttoe=8e98989253a081e43a1172423e1de4a6302a204e32172fe192c6f73ba74dd1d9c157793613dbaef5 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A Platonic, singularity theory of mind.
A Platonic, singularity theory of mind. Current philosophies of mind debate whether mind and body are a dualism (mind and body) or a monism (mindbody). But these do not address the nature of mind itself. As the pragmatics of language demonstrate, Mind (first person singular) must be a singularity if we are to have a singular identity, perceiving the world from a singular point of view, and acting as a single person. It seems unlikely that such a singularity could be formed from a pluralistic brain, or pluralistic world, any more than a king could be formed from his populace. In addition, the mind is subjective (mental, nonphysical) , while the brain and the rest of the world are objective (physical). Following along these lines, then, consciousness must be a Platonic singularity. But since we all have minds, there must be multiple singularities within this singularity, whch Leibniz calls monads. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
A Platonic, singularity theory of space,creation and entanglement
A Platonic, singularity theory of space Plato envisioned the One, a singularity from which the pluralistic world emerged(s). Big Bang theories of Creation point back to such a singularity from which space emerged, and black hole or white hole theories also point to singularities possibly related to creations. Penrose has also proposed the twister, an entity which might possibly have similarities to those events. Recently I have also presented a Platonic, singularity theory of mind, in which the mental or nonphysical produces the phjysical. What if we take Plato seriously and examine the possibility that physical space (spaetime) emerged from the nonphysical ? One might express this is that physical existence has emerged from nonphysical Being or Mind. I am no mathematician, perhaps a mathematical physicist could construct such a theory. Entanglement and Bell's Theorem could be related to this. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
The Leibniz difference: Me doesn't have an I, because me is a materialist.
The Leibniz difference: Me doesn't have an I, because me is a materialist. An I is first person singular, me is third person singular. I is a subject, me is an object. I is part of mind, me is part of brain. Opposite. Big difference. It doesn't take a genius to see the difference, but Dennett, Chalmers, and the other materialists don't seem to be aware of this crucial difference, which any grade school child is aware of. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Me doesn't have an I, because me is a materialist.
Hi - Me doesn't have an I, because me is a materialist. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Re: [4DWorldx] Fw: [BC-FREE-MINERS-AND-MASONS] Global temperature forthe past 5 million years (since the start of Pliocene)
Hi Hans Dieter Franke Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Hans Dieter Franke Receiver: 4DWorldx Time: 2013-09-16, 02:50:58 Subject: Re: [4DWorldx] Fw: [BC-FREE-MINERS-AND-MASONS] Global temperature forthe past 5 million years (since the start of Pliocene) The so called medieval warm time is relatively well documented by reports of monks. As can still today be seen from names of villages and so on, wine was grown up to the polar circle in Norway. The period of extreme climate had no winter for 100 years and lasting very hot summers. The reason is unknown but explained by extreme oceanic circulation but greenhouse gasses are entirely out of the question. This warm time ended almost suddenly within a few months turned to a cold and dry climate. - Original Message - From: M To: 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [4DWorldx] Fw: [BC-FREE-MINERS-AND-MASONS] Global temperature for the past 5 million years (since the start of Pliocene) - Original Message - From: M To: y...@discovery.ca ; i...@knowledge.ca Cc: MITOCW ; bc-free-miners-and-mas...@yahoogroups.ca Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 7:52 PM Subject: [BC-FREE-MINERS-AND-MASONS] Global temperature for the past 5 million years (since the start of Pliocene) How well is it known year by year? How has the Antarctic ice sheet varied over that time? How have the high mountain glaciers (as in BC) varied over that time? What % of world has been iced over since 5 mya, year by year? How well can anyone predict future global warming/cooling if all that is not known well? M - Original Message - From: M To: 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:20 PM Subject: Fw: [FUTURESAPIENS] Re: [4DWorldx] record gains in sea ice in north america - Original Message - From: M To: 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com Cc: futuresapi...@yahoogroups.ca Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:20 PM Subject: [FUTURESAPIENS] Re: [4DWorldx] record gains in sea ice in north america When we've been here 10 million years, bright shining as the sun ... What has climate been like for the past 10 my? M - Original Message - From: Anna To: 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:05 PM Subject: Re: [4DWorldx] record gains in sea ice in north america Yeah, but what about the abnormally hot temperatures in other areas? I think that the climate changes are caused by shifting magnetic poles. Anna From: Chaotic Inflation Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:47 AM To: 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com ; 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com ; theoretical_physics_bo...@yahoogroups.com ; theoretical_phys...@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [4DWorldx] record gains in sea ice in north america looking at the graphs on that site, this is the largest one year in sea ice in the north hemisphere on record and the most sea ice we've had here since 2002- which (maybe not coincidentally) was the year which held the record for the latest hurricane on record. 2002-03 was a very cold and snowy winter here- we had our first snow in October and a rare April daytime snowstorm on Yankees Opening Day (4/7/03). in between President's Day saw the largest snowstorm on record here- 30 inches! From: Chaotic Inflation To: 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com 4dwor...@yahoogroups.com; theoretical_physics_bo...@yahoogroups.com ; theoretical_phys...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 6:35 AM Subject: [4DWorldx] record gains in sea ice in north america sea ice seems to be on the rise in our part of the globe- up 67 percent also this is the latest that we've ever hard our first hurricane. http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/09/14/earth-gains-a-record-amount-of-sea-ice-in-2013-earth-has-gained-19000-manhattans-of-sea-ice-since-this-date-last-year-the-largest-increase-on-record/ http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/67-increase-in-arctic-ice-extent-since-last-year/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit
Re: Re: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology
Hi spudboy100 Being (mind, life,consciousness, first person singular) isn't part of the spacetime universe. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: spudboy100 Receiver: rclough,everything-list Time: 2013-09-14, 14:34:11 Subject: Re: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Well, its just an idea that fascinates me. Reading Gerhard t'Hooft in the 1990's sort of set it all in motion. Also Raphael Bousso, in their analysis oh the universe as hologram, etc. Are we the chuck of matter, or the reflection in the mirror? That kind of thing. -Original Message- From: Roger Clough To: spudboy100 ; everything-list Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2013 12:09 pm Subject: Re: Re: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Hi spudboy100 Sure. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: spudboy100 Receiver: everything-list,rclough Time: 2013-09-14, 10:01:02 Subject: Re: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology One idea I have been kicking around, is viewing through physics, that yes mind is bran, brain is mind, but not totally. More, precisely, the notion that the data, the pattern identity, the mind, the soul, personality, memory (whatever we wish to call it) is analogous to a computer network, where data and information, all information, gets written to some sort of media, a long, ways, off. Think of this as a read-write function of a storage area network. All server farms have remote sites to preserve data, for disaster recovery. All large companies have this, and so do governments as well. I am guessing that this is a feature of the cosmos-or really, just, hoping that it is so. Mitch -Original Message- From: Roger Clough To: - Roger Clough Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2013 8:47 am Subject: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Since it is often based on laboratory experiments, parapsychology has a scientific basis. But these results are smeared by proponents of the cult of materialism, which cannot accept the view that there is such a thing as a mind (a Self). That alone makes materialism a joke. Materialism originated with the Enlightenment primarily as a reaction against religion, replacing it with reason, as well as a misinterpretation or reinterpretation of Descartes, by claiming that mind can interact with the body, which Descartes maintained were two different substances, by instead claiming that both mind and body are matter. That mind is matter is nonsensical. Leibniz took the other tack, that of Idealism, in which both brain and mind were Mind, which has the philosophical support of Kant and Plato. But the metaphysics of Leibniz are difficult especially in the face of the bad and completely non-Cartesian philosophy materialisam because materialism, while it doesn't work for mind, DOES work very well for Newtonian mechanics. Hence conventional science these days is swolidly materialistic and Leibniz's platonism is liost to history. I will be posting more on this, but to begin with you might want to visit my Leibniz site, http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology
Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Since it is often based on laboratory experiments, parapsychology has a scientific basis. But these results are smeared by proponents of the cult of materialism, which cannot accept the view that there is such a thing as a mind (a Self). That alone makes materialism a joke. Materialism originated with the Enlightenment primarily as a reaction against religion, replacing it with reason, as well as a misinterpretation or reinterpretation of Descartes, by claiming that mind can interact with the body, which Descartes maintained were two different substances, by instead claiming that both mind and body are matter. That mind is matter is nonsensical. Leibniz took the other tack, that of Idealism, in which both brain and mind were Mind, which has the philosophical support of Kant and Plato. But the metaphysics of Leibniz are difficult especially in the face of the bad and completely non-Cartesian philosophy materialisam because materialism, while it doesn't work for mind, DOES work very well for Newtonian mechanics. Hence conventional science these days is swolidly materialistic and Leibniz's platonism is liost to history. I will be posting more on this, but to begin with you might want to visit my Leibniz site, http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Re: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology
Hi spudboy100 Sure. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: spudboy100 Receiver: everything-list,rclough Time: 2013-09-14, 10:01:02 Subject: Re: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology One idea I have been kicking around, is viewing through physics, that yes mind is bran, brain is mind, but not totally. More, precisely, the notion that the data, the pattern identity, the mind, the soul, personality, memory (whatever we wish to call it) is analogous to a computer network, where data and information, all information, gets written to some sort of media, a long, ways, off. Think of this as a read-write function of a storage area network. All server farms have remote sites to preserve data, for disaster recovery. All large companies have this, and so do governments as well. I am guessing that this is a feature of the cosmos-or really, just, hoping that it is so. Mitch -Original Message- From: Roger Clough To: - Roger Clough Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2013 8:47 am Subject: Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Leibniz, Idealism and Parapsychology Since it is often based on laboratory experiments, parapsychology has a scientific basis. But these results are smeared by proponents of the cult of materialism, which cannot accept the view that there is such a thing as a mind (a Self). That alone makes materialism a joke. Materialism originated with the Enlightenment primarily as a reaction against religion, replacing it with reason, as well as a misinterpretation or reinterpretation of Descartes, by claiming that mind can interact with the body, which Descartes maintained were two different substances, by instead claiming that both mind and body are matter. That mind is matter is nonsensical. Leibniz took the other tack, that of Idealism, in which both brain and mind were Mind, which has the philosophical support of Kant and Plato. But the metaphysics of Leibniz are difficult especially in the face of the bad and completely non-Cartesian philosophy materialisam because materialism, while it doesn't work for mind, DOES work very well for Newtonian mechanics. Hence conventional science these days is swolidly materialistic and Leibniz's platonism is liost to history. I will be posting more on this, but to begin with you might want to visit my Leibniz site, http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz. What's the difference between existence and being ?
Leibniz. What's the difference between existence and being ? According to the metaphysics of Leibniz, the universe has two often correlated aspects, existence and being, each usually the flip side of the other. 1. Existence. Physical objects exist in spacetime. This includes the elementary particles, batted baseballs, and such. These are dealt with using physics are quantitative, and thus are mathematical. This is the objective universe. 2. Being. Nonphysical subjects, which are not in spacetime, such as mind, intelligence, ideas, and life, have being. Leibniz calls these entities monads when they refer to physical objects, but ideas when they have no physical correlates. These are qualitative and non-mathematical, and together comprise the subjective universe. The infinite collection of monads is a complete description of the physical universe. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Help Kickstart World War III
Help Kickstart World War III http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-sdO6pwVHQ Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why Platonism (as in Leibniz) is the only complete philosophy.
Why Platonism (as in Leibniz) is the only complete philosophy. Materialism seems to be an incomplete philosophy, because while it correctly places reason as the basis of all that is, it doesn't include the reasoner. We all have our heads in the clouds, sotospeak, since Eternity or the One views the physical world through our minds. There's no other way that perception could work, since the One is necessary at a high levels to stop the infimtie regress of perception (homunculi inside of homyunculi, etc.) Eternity or the One is nowhere, since it is beyond spacetime, in order to prevent tbhe infitie regress. Thus the One views the world through us. The One is what the material world comes from and is coming from and will come from. Because of this, and because in Platonism the world emerges from the One (but can't in materialism), Platonism is the only comnplete philosophy. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Obama's pet
Obama's pet John Boehner, you're Obamna's pet, you whimper and your cowell, You never show your fangs or bite, you never bark or growl So when we're stuck with BoennerCare, we'll take you to a vet And have you fixed up properly to safely be his pet. - Roger Clough Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Kant's disproof of materialism and empiricism
Kant's disproof of materialism and empiricism Materialists argue that in essence we are no more than our bodies. Empiricists such as Hume ruled out the possible influence of anything transcendental in our perception of objects. But that position was disproven by Kant, for example in his transcdendent deduction of the role of the self in perception http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-transcendental/ in which cognitive science and philosophers such as Dennett and Chalmers seems to have overlooked the critical importance of the transcendental. As a result, Kant gave this argument against materialism and empiricism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant Kant proposed a Copernican Revolution-in-reverse, saying that: Up to now it has been assumed that all our cognition must conform to the objects [positivism] but ... let us once try whether we do not get farther with the problems of metaphysics by assuming that the objects must conform to our cognition[transcendental idealism]. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough .com/malfunct -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Kant's disproof of materialism and empiricism
Kant's disproof of materialism and empiricism Materialists argue that in essence we are no more than our bodies. Empiricists such as Hume ruled out the possible influence of anything transcendental in our perception of objects. But that position was disproven by Kant, for example in his transcdendent deduction of the role of the self in perception http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-transcendental/ in which cognitive science and philosophers such as Dennett and Chalmers seems to have overlooked the critical importance of the transcendental. As a result, Kant gave this argument against materialism and empiricism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant Kant proposed a Copernican Revolution-in-reverse, saying that: Up to now it has been assumed that all our cognition must conform to the objects [materialism and positivism] but ... let us once try whether we do not get farther with the problems of metaphysics by assuming that the objects must conform to our cognition[transcendental idealism]. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Leibniz view on why why bottom up control cannot work for the brain
A Leibnizian view on why bottom up programing cannot work for the brain 1. In order for the brain to control or govern there must be a single governor 2. The single governor must be the single most dominant element in the system and must control downward, not upward 3. Materialistic science and programming has no such feature. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Re: Leibniz's final causation as the Self, the active agent of change
Hi spudboy100 Anything that moves according to rules, a program, regulations, a control, etc. is not mind. Mind has to be free and unconstrained, at least in principle. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: spudboy100 Receiver: everything-list,rclough Time: 2013-08-27, 13:14:57 Subject: Re: Leibniz's final causation as the Self, the active agent of change My B in law posited, what moves the cursor, using a pc as an analogy of mind? Of course the cursor can be programmed to move and act, by a program, but then who made the programmer? Leibniz and other thinkers may have asked, who made God? Terrific question. My sense of things is the use of an old fashioned or a new fashioned map. One is paper and you use your eyes and fingers, another map is you punch in the destination, and a women's voice speaks Turn right in 5 miles! Both are maps. Similarly asking who created God is akin to asking your maps, where is the next alien intelligent civilization in the Galaxy? Our little maps cannot tell us, because we're out of range. Having said this, where are the space aliens, or where is God, may not be detectable on our maps, simply because we haven't explored the universe sufficiently. Physicist, Freeman Dyson, has written that to know more things we have to have increasingly better observation, and to do this, we have to have improved tools for better experimentation and observation. The Self may be detectable or comprehendible through better tools, and one of these tools is assuredly mathematics. Mitch -Original Message- From: Roger Clough To: - Roger Clough Sent: Mon, Aug 26, 2013 3:31 am Subject: Leibniz's final causation as the Self, the active agent of change Leibniz's final causation as the Self, the active agent of change So far, materialistic models of the mind, such as Dennett's, are essentially passive. There is no internal active agent of change, which one might call the Self. The internal active agent of change is desire, which we might define as a mismatch between the current state and a goal. In other words, the internal active agent of change is final causation, which has been discussed by Leibniz as typical of life, and also by Aristotle in his four basic causes of change. This desire to achieve a personal goal appears mentally as an intention, which is the active agent of change. This is what we call the Self, and is the missing element of AI as well as current models of the mind. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
