Re: the tribal self

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 14:10, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal I disagree about the self not being a social contruct. When I talk about the self, I am not talking about you. I think more to the control structure making it possible to have a self. I explain it from time to time, but it is a bit

Re: Homunculi

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 14:16, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal The materialists don't seem to have a very specific idea of what governs us (the self) and its actual (live) governing. The self is something like a homunculus, which as Dennet correctly remarks, leads to an infinite regress in

Re: Dasein

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 15:13, Roger wrote: Heidegger tried to express the point I tried to make below by using the word dasein. Being there . Not merely describing a topic or item, but seeing the world from its point of view. Being inside it. Being there. I agree. This is what I call the first

Re: equivalence between math and computations

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 15:14, Alberto G. Corona wrote: I ´m seduced and intrigued by the Bruno´s final conclussións of the COMP hypothesis. But I had a certain disconfort with the idea of a simulation of the reality by means of an algorithm for reasons I will describe later. Comp is I am a

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 16:59, Jason Resch wrote: These are quite interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YPYYvZOGlU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09Q5l47jTy8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwpv=PBXO_6Jn1fs Are these not forms of life? I would say yes. Quite cute :) Note that

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 17:29, meekerdb wrote: On 8/15/2012 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is mine if the random generator is part of me. It is not mine if the generator is outside of me (eg flipping the coin). I don't see this. Why would the generator being part of you make it your

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread Russell Standish
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:15:59PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Aug 2012, at 10:12, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:01:10PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Aug 2012, at 12:30, Russell Standish wrote: Assuming the coin is operating inside the agent's body?

Re: pre-established harmony

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 15 Aug 2012, at 21:09, Stephen P. King wrote: On 8/15/2012 5:21 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: OK. The ontological primary medium is given by any universal system. I have chosen arithmetic to fix the thing. OK, you chose arithmetic. But my claim is that is only one of an infinite number

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 2:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Aug 2012, at 17:29, meekerdb wrote: On 8/15/2012 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is mine if the random generator is part of me. It is not mine if the generator is outside of me (eg flipping the coin). I don't see this. Why would the

Re: Re: the tribal self

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Alberto G. Corona Not if you select the best friends, the best woman, the best job, the best stocks and the best doctor to help you get rich, stay healthy, enjoy life, and raise a family. Or they select you. These would help in getting an upscale woman. And perhaps she has the social skills

?

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
BRUNO: I meant that some fixed hardware computer can emulate a virtual self-modifying version of itself, so that your point is not valid. ROGER: What point ? And emulate in what sense ? Ie could a computer ever be a good wine taster ? BRUNO: If not you introduce a notion of living matter

Re: ?

2012-08-16 Thread Richard Ruquist
Roger, According to string theory, the monad or Calabi-Yau compact particles are hardware. Richard On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Roger rclo...@verizon.net wrote: BRUNO: I meant that some fixed hardware computer can emulate a virtual self-modifying version of itself, so that your point

The fine-tuning argument

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal Nothing is for sure, all I can quote are probabilties. The improbability of life (based on Hoyle's argument about the humungous improbability of the C atom being created by chance) suggests to me at least that a comp is highly improbable if it is to emulated a living brain.

Can bacteria be simulated with Turing machines ?

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal If there is an existing proof that bacteria can be modeled by Turing machines, I'd find that extremely insteresting. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the

Re: Re: Leibniz on the unconscious

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal That's Cosmic Clockmaker argument. God created the universe and let it just run by istself with no intervention. But where or how did God come up with a blueprint ? Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so

RE: Is the Turing machine like a tabla rasa ?

2012-08-16 Thread William R. Buckley
Bruno: Are you reading Stanley Salthy? Know of his work in hierarchy theory? wrb From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 12:56 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Is

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 09:12, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:15:59PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Aug 2012, at 10:12, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:01:10PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Aug 2012, at 12:30, Russell Standish wrote: Assuming

Self-image and self-identity

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal Can this machine recognize its self in a mirror or line-up ? Self-image would be a critical part of self-identity. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following

Re: Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal The Bible teaches that God spends much of his time looking into men's hearts to see if love or evil rests there. Would this be part of your definition of omniscience ? Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 15:06, meekerdb wrote: On 8/16/2012 2:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Aug 2012, at 17:29, meekerdb wrote: On 8/15/2012 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is mine if the random generator is part of me. It is not mine if the generator is outside of me (eg flipping

Re: Re: Misusing Descartes' model

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal Thanks for the information. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-15,

Re: The fine-tuning argument

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 7:42 AM, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Nothing is for sure, all I can quote are probabilties. The improbability of life (based on Hoyle's argument about the humungous improbability of the C atom being created by chance) Hoyle's argument had nothing to do with carbon being

RE: Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread William R. Buckley
I used the term *omniscience* in a rather general way, as a substitute for the term *universal* though it should be said that the purpose was to serve as adjective to the term *computational* rather than the other way around, as might be expected when the phrase is given in the form of

Re: ?

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:21, Roger wrote: BRUNO: I meant that some fixed hardware computer can emulate a virtual self-modifying version of itself, so that your point is not valid. ROGER: What point ? And emulate in what sense ? Ie could a computer ever be a good wine taster ? As I

Re: Re: Severe limitations of a computer as a brain model

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal You have a much more rational view of the mind/brain than I do. You seem to believe that reason must always be involved, but IMHO it need not and in faxct rarely is involved. I can walk up stairs without looking at my feet or thinking right or left foot. And when I see a red

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 8:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Aug 2012, at 15:06, meekerdb wrote: On 8/16/2012 2:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Aug 2012, at 17:29, meekerdb wrote: On 8/15/2012 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is mine if the random generator is part of me. It is not mine if the

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 8:34 AM, William R. Buckley wrote: I used the term **omniscience** in a rather general way, as a substitute for the term **universal** though it should be said that the purpose was to serve as adjective to the term **computational** rather than the other way around, as might

Re: The fine-tuning argument

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:42, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Nothing is for sure, all I can quote are probabilties. The improbability of life (based on Hoyle's argument about the humungous improbability of the C atom being created by chance) suggests to me at least that a comp is highly

Re: Re: Libet's experimental result re-evaluated!

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal What is physical primitiveness ? Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-15,

Re: Can bacteria be simulated with Turing machines ?

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:45, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal If there is an existing proof that bacteria can be modeled by Turing machines, I'd find that extremely insteresting. It depends what you mean by bacteria. With comp no piece of matter can be emulated by a Turing machine. So if by

Re: Is life computable ?

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:47, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Has anybody ever provided a proof that life is a computable entity ? Nobody agrees on what life is. If it is material, then life is not emulable. If it is a more abstract information exchange, then it might be. Keep in mind that,

Re: Leibniz on the unconscious

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:52, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal That's Cosmic Clockmaker argument. I don't think so. If I am machine, neither God, nor physical reality, nor consciousness, nor any Protagorean virtue, can be emulated genuinely on a computer. Computer lived in the arithmetical

Re: Is the Turing machine like a tabla rasa ?

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:59, William R. Buckley wrote: Bruno: Are you reading Stanley Salthy? Know of his work in hierarchy theory? I don't find references. Please give a link, or do a summary, if possible explaining why that would be relevant. Thanks. Bruno wrb From:

Re: Self-image and self-identity

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:09, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Can this machine recognize its self in a mirror or line-up ? No problem. Self-image would be a critical part of self-identity. It might be a delusion too, I think. (they fall in that delusion trap in the movie Source Code if you

Re: Theory of Existence

2012-08-16 Thread Stephen P. King
On 8/16/2012 7:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: One must assume a mereology (whole-part relational scheme) in any ontological theory or else there is no way to explain or communicate it or about it. That is exactly what I told you. Any universal system has a mereology. But your existence theory

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:11, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal The Bible teaches that God spends much of his time looking into men's hearts to see if love or evil rests there. Would this be part of your definition of omniscience ? I don't believe in any form of ommiscience. You might read a book

the Holy Grail

2012-08-16 Thread Roger
Hi Bruno Marchal Wow ! If true this would be the Holy Grail I've sought, and the irony is that I could not understand what to do with it. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/16/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the

Re: There are no a priori definite properties.

2012-08-16 Thread Stephen P. King
On 8/16/2012 7:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: [SPK] There is no unique canonical labeling set of entities. There is (at least!) an uncountable infinite equivalence class of them. Labels and valuations cannot be considered as separable from the entities that they act on as valuation. Therefore we

Re: Severe limitations of a computer as a brain model

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Roger, On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:40, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal You have a much more rational view of the mind/brain than I do. You seem to believe that reason must always be involved, but IMHO it need not and in faxct rarely is involved. I can walk up stairs without looking at my feet or

Re: pre-established harmony

2012-08-16 Thread Stephen P. King
On 8/16/2012 7:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: [SPK] You do not have an explanation of interactions in COMP [BM] I have only the quantum logic. This does not change the vaility of the reasoning. You reason like that, Darwin theory fail to predict the mass of the boson, and string theory ignore

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:44, meekerdb wrote: On 8/16/2012 8:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Aug 2012, at 15:06, meekerdb wrote: On 8/16/2012 2:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Aug 2012, at 17:29, meekerdb wrote: On 8/15/2012 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is mine if the random

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:46, meekerdb wrote: On 8/16/2012 8:34 AM, William R. Buckley wrote: I used the term *omniscience* in a rather general way, as a substitute for the term *universal* though it should be said that the purpose was to serve as adjective to the term *computational*

Re: Libet's experimental result re-evaluated!

2012-08-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:52, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal What is physical primitiveness ? primitiveness of X means that we accept the existence, and some property of X in the starting assumption we make for a theory. Physicalist believes that physics can reach such objects, like with

Re: Is the Turing machine like a tabla rasa ?

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 9:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:59, William R. Buckley wrote: Bruno: Are you reading Stanley Salthy? Know of his work in hierarchy theory? I don't find references. Please give a link, or do a summary, if possible explaining why that would be relevant.

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: I have to say it again, it doesn't mean that a particular one cannot solve the halting problem for a particular algorithm. And unless you prove that that particular algorithm is undecidable If it's undecidable that

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 12:32 PM, John Clark wrote: If it's undecidable that means its either false or true but contains no proof, that is to say it's truth can't be demonstrated in a finite number of steps. And Turing proved that there are a infinite number of undecidable statements that you can not know

Re: Why AI is impossible

2012-08-16 Thread meekerdb
On 8/16/2012 12:32 PM, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com mailto:allco...@gmail.com wrote: I have to say it again, it doesn't mean that a particular one cannot solve the halting problem for a particular algorithm. And unless

Re: What is physical primitiveness

2012-08-16 Thread Stephen P. King
On 8/16/2012 1:13 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Aug 2012, at 17:52, Roger wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal What is physical primitiveness ? primitiveness of X means that we accept the existence, and some property of X in the starting assumption we make for a theory. Dear Roger and Bruno, I

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-08-16 Thread Russell Standish
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 05:06:31PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Aug 2012, at 09:12, Russell Standish wrote: Why would this be any different with random number generators? A coin flips, and I do something based on the outcome. It is not my choice (except insofar as I chose to follow an

Re: A rat brain robot

2012-08-16 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: It's begging the question to say the computer chips have 'the same functionality' as a rat's brain and then presume to claim that demonstrates functional equivalence. The whole question is what is meant by