Perception, apperception, and consciousness

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Alberto G. Corona Exactly. The raw perception is also what Peirce calls Firstness. Secondness is consciousness or internal reflection by mind to make sense of the perception in terms of what we know. Then Thirdness should be the recognition or naming of that image. Roger Clough,

a creator must know what he is doing (must have intelligence).

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal But those mechanims are just mechanisms. They do not know what they do, that knowing combined with choice of what to do being another description of intelligence, which is what makes a creator greater than his creations. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: Some embeddings that could be represented by this number relations could prove utter nonsense. For example, if you interpret 166568 to mean != or ^6 instead of =, the whole proof is nonsense. Sure, and if I interpret the soap for a pope, I can be in trouble.

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, ROGER: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. MEEKERDB: Bad decision. You are the one cutting the corpus callosum here. ROGER: You have to. Quantity is an objective measure, quality is a

Why science only works with half a brain

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal Science can only deal with objective issues or things (facts). But the world also consists of values-- qualitative or subjective issues. Hence science has only half a brain. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to

Re: Re: Why we debate religion: two completely different types of truth.

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal SNIP BRUNO: I mainly agree [that there are two types of truth, one ruling the objective world, the other, being subjective, ruling the subjective world]. But then why coming with factual assertion, about a Jesus guy. I can accept the parabolas, but I can't take a

Re: Re: Why the supreme monad is necessary in Leibniz's universe

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal SNIP BRUNO: Matter is what is not determined, and thus contingent indeed, at its very roots, like W and M in a self-duplication experiment, or like, plausibly when looking at a photon through a calcite crystal. ROGER: So Newton's Laws, such as F = ma, are not

Re: Perception, apperception, and consciousness

2012-09-13 Thread Stephen P. King
Hi Roger, Hear Hear! Peirce is the best to see the basic ideas and hints on how to extend them. ;-) On 9/13/2012 6:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Alberto G. Corona Exactly. The raw perception is also what Peirce calls Firstness. Secondness is consciousness or internal reflection by mind

On marrying a talking doll

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal Again, if my daughter is human, why would she want to marry a robot ? She wants a talking doll I suppose. Probably needs a shrink. Roger -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Stephen P. King
Hi benjayk, This is exactly what I have been complaining to Bruno about. He does not see several things that are problematic. 1) Godel numberings are not unique. Thus there is no a single abslute structure of relations, there is an infinity that cannot be reduced. 2) the physical

Re: Re: Fwd: [4DWorldx] thanks to Moon I found this creazy story abouthead transplants

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi Sorry, I refused to join Vimeo because they wanted too much information. And I find terms of service a bit scarey. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving

Re: Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi John Clark Theology is based on faith and moral practice. In other words, meaning and value, neither of which you will find in facts. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function.

Re: Re: Re: Re: victims of faith

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi John Clark Your mind then must also be like a germ. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: John Clark Receiver: everything-list Time:

Re: Re: Why we debate religion: two completely different types of truth.

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Richard Ruquist The Psalms are full of doubt and hope for an answer. Obviously doubt is a component of faith. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following

Re: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg The fact is that the only incentive businesses look to is profit. So demonizing profit doesn't do any good. And urging them to hire workers doesn't work. Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that

Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Roger, On 12 Sep 2012, at 14:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Applying science to religion can be no more successful than applying science to poetry. Both poetry and religion have to be experienced if they are of any use at all, and science is a moron with regard to experiential

Re: Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal The shared part of religion (or science) is called belief(s). They are exclusively in the fom of words. For example words from the Bible, and the Creeds. The personal or private part of religion is called faith. It is not belief, for it is wordless, is more

Re: Re: Re: The sin of NDAA

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Russell Standish and Bruno, Nobody else gets Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Russell Standish Receiver: everything-list Time:

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 12 Sep 2012, at 15:28, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:05 PM, benjayk benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Sep 2012, at 12:39, benjayk wrote: Our discussion is going nowhere. You don't see my points and assume I want to

duplicate copies fixed ?

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Sorry--I did find a possible reason for the duplicates and fixed it. Let me know if it continues Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content -

Re: Why we debate religion: two completely different types of truth.

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Richard, Judaism, but also taoism have a tradition to consider texts has deserving comments, and sequence of comments. That is nice indeed, and make the approach closer to the scientific approach. But I talk about ideal science, as science can have pope and argument per authority too,

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 12 Sep 2012, at 21:48, benjayk wrote: Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:05 PM, benjayk benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.comwrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Sep 2012, at 12:39, benjayk wrote: Our discussion is going nowhere. You don't see my points and

Re: the nothing but fallacy.

2012-09-13 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: I just gave a positivistic argument to convince people that adhere to the positivistic faith. That does not mean that I´m materialist nor positivist. Positivism, whatever else it is, is not faith. Faith is when you

Re: victims of faith

2012-09-13 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: There is no difference at all between religious mitifications and other mitifucatuons . See form, example the paper about Darwin that I posted. religion is a label that appears when the mith is old enough it has

Re: a creator must know what he is doing (must have intelligence).

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Roger, On 13 Sep 2012, at 12:36, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal But those mechanims are just mechanisms. You are just doing the just fallacy. A variant of the nothing but fallacy. They do not know what they do, We do have serious evidence that some mechanism, actually most

Re: Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread John Clark
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Theology is based on faith I understand that theology is based on faith, what I don't understand is why faith is supposed to be a virtue. and moral practice. Then why is the history of religion a list of one atrocity after

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Sep 2012, at 12:40, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Some embeddings that could be represented by this number relations could prove utter nonsense. For example, if you interpret 166568 to mean != or ^6 instead of =, the whole proof is nonsense. Sure, and if I interpret the

Re: On marrying a talking doll

2012-09-13 Thread Jason Resch
Roger, What about Data from Star Trek? Jason On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:53 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Again, if my daughter is human, why would she want to marry a robot ? She wants a talking doll I suppose. Probably needs a shrink. Roger -- You

Re: The nothing but fallacy in explaining away God (or anything)

2012-09-13 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: I call this the nothing but fallacy There is indeed a nothing but fallacy, such as: a computer can't be conscious because when you look at it at a close enough level you find nothing but a bunch of zeros and ones. It is the

imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread Roger Clough
Hi everything-list Since human thought and perception consists of both a logical quantitative or objective component as well as a feelings-spiritual qualitative or subjective components, would it make any sense to do comp using complex numbers, where the real part is the objective part of the

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:55, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi benjayk, This is exactly what I have been complaining to Bruno about. He does not see several things that are problematic. 1) Godel numberings are not unique. Thus there is no a single abslute structure of relations, there is an

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
This is why I reject comp, because it cannot access feelings or qualities, whereas feelings can and do access arithmetic (even directly as rhythm, music, some forms of visual art, etc). Because we know about feelings, we can project that knowledge on top of arithmetic ideas and conceive of

Re: Re: Re: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ?

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:33:47 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: Hi Craig Weinberg The fact is that the only incentive businesses look to is profit. So demonizing profit doesn't do any good. And urging them to hire workers doesn't work. Sounds exactly like cancer. The only

Re: the nothing but fallacy.

2012-09-13 Thread Alberto G. Corona
Even to believe that what we see exist in a objective, external reality is an act of faith. To believe, and to believe only in the authority of what is called science at a certain time in history is another act of faith in the authority of someone that administer some truth ( concrete scientist

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Sep 2012, at 17:44, Roger Clough wrote: Hi everything-list Since human thought and perception consists of both a logical quantitative or objective component as well as a feelings-spiritual qualitative or subjective components, would it make any sense to do comp using complex

Re: the nothing but fallacy.

2012-09-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Sep 2012, at 15:36, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: I just gave a positivistic argument to convince people that adhere to the positivistic faith. That does not mean that I´m materialist nor positivist.

Re: The nothing but fallacy in explaining away God (or anything)

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 11:36:37 AM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net javascript:wrote: I call this the nothing but fallacy There is indeed a nothing but fallacy, such as: a computer can't be conscious because when you look at it

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread John Clark
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: I reject comp, because it cannot access feelings or qualities And you have deduced this by using the nothing but fallacy: even the largest computer is nothing but a collection of on and off switches. Never mind that

Re: Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:43:39 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal The shared part of religion (or science) is called belief(s). They are exclusively in the fom of words. For example words from the Bible, and the Creeds. The personal or private part of

Re: Fwd: [4DWorldx] thanks to Moon I found this creazy story abouthead transplants

2012-09-13 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
I have not joined Vimeo. I can watch the video directly on the linked page. It does not work for you this way? Evgenii On 13.09.2012 14:03 Roger Clough said the following: Hi Evgenii Rudnyi Sorry, I refused to join Vimeo because they wanted too much information. And I find terms of service

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread meekerdb
On 9/13/2012 4:55 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi benjayk, This is exactly what I have been complaining to Bruno about. He does not see several things that are problematic. 1) Godel numberings are not unique. Thus there is no a single abslute structure of relations, there is an infinity

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 1:15:56 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: I reject comp, because it cannot access feelings or qualities And you have deduced this by using the nothing but fallacy: even the

Re: Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 10:58:10 AM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net javascript:wrote: Theology is based on faith I understand that theology is based on faith, what I don't understand is why faith is supposed to be a virtue. I'm

Re: If I ever doubt that there is a God,

2012-09-13 Thread Jason Resch
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:06:44 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Sep 11, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 1:20:49 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/13/2012 12:05 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:55, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi benjayk, This is exactly what I have been complaining to Bruno about. He does not see several things that are problematic. 1) Godel numberings are not unique. Thus there is no a single

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/13/2012 1:36 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 9/13/2012 4:55 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi benjayk, This is exactly what I have been complaining to Bruno about. He does not see several things that are problematic. 1) Godel numberings are not unique. Thus there is no a single abslute

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/13/2012 1:38 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, September 13, 2012 1:15:56 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I reject comp, because it cannot access feelings or qualities And you

Re: The poverty of computers

2012-09-13 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/13/2012 1:43 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: I'm actually with you on this JC, although mainly because by faith I think most people really mean hope. Screw hope. To me faith is just about being ok with things even if they don't seem ok right now. It's more of a patience or benefit of the doubt

Re: victims of faith

2012-09-13 Thread Alberto G. Corona
2012/9/13 Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com: On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: There is no difference at all between religious mitifications and other mitifucatuons . See form, example the paper about Darwin that I posted. religion is a label

Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers Absent Qualia, Fading Qualia, Dancing Qualia You should have a look at ithttp://consc.net/papers/qualia.htmlfirst. This thought experiment is intended to generalize principles common to both computationalism and functionalism so that the often

Re: If I ever doubt that there is a God,

2012-09-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 2:05:34 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: They don't come from the simple definition. They come from your retina and visual cortex. That's what I am trying to tell you. There is nothing there but the meaningless seed. Were do you propose my retina gets it from?

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread John Clark
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: would it make any sense to do comp using complex numbers, where the real part is the objective part of the mental the imaginary part is the subjective part of the mental The names real and imaginary are unfortunate because

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread John Clark
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: This is the symbol grounding problem pointed out by Searle's Chinese Room I've said it before I'll say it again, Searle's Chinese Room is the single stupidest thought experiment ever devised by the mind of man. Of

Re: imaginary numbers in comp

2012-09-13 Thread Brian Tenneson
We might as well just use ordered pairs of integers or rational numbers. On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:45:53 AM UTC-7, rclough wrote: Hi everything-list Since human thought and perception consists of both a logical quantitative or objective component as well as a feelings-spiritual

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-09-13 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers Absent Qualia, Fading Qualia, Dancing Qualia You should have a look at it first. This thought experiment is intended to generalize principles common to both