Every belief system has a core and a set of pseudo logic, which is a
mix of pseudo arguments ad authoritas that justify their beliefs.
Positivsts have Phisics as its core, defence shield. From this,
almost everything else is derived. Because the law of angular momentum
is true and is science,
Hi Terren,
On 11 Sep 2012, at 19:45, Terren Suydam wrote:
Hi Bruno,
Maybe it's time to update your fractal zoom links :-)
http://vimeo.com/12185093
Here's a couple 3d mandelbulb worlds which no doubt require
significantly more than 1K to implement, but purely mathematical
nonetheless:
On 30 Aug 2012, at 04:40, Terren Suydam wrote:
hmmm, my interpretation is that in platonia, all computations, all the
potential infinities of computations, have the same ontological
status. Meaning, there's nothing meaningful that can be said with
regard to any particular state of the UD - one
There are different kinds of beliefs. The believer that has no strong
evidences, know that he believe. He know that he believe.
The second kind of believer does not know that he believe, because he
live in a environment where the evidences are uncontested in the
environment where he lives. For
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote:
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 [actually it is BRUNO]: Bad decision. You are the one
cutting the corpus callosum here.
Hi Brian,
On 13 Sep 2012, at 22:04, Brian Tenneson wrote:
Bruno,
You use B as a predicate symbol for belief I think.
I use for the modal unspecified box, in some context (in place of the
more common []).
Then I use it mainly for the box corresponding to Gödel's beweisbar
(provability)
On 13 Sep 2012, at 20:08, Stephen P. King wrote:
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
On 12 Sep 2012, at 18:47, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
makes a bridge between two fields,
What two fields?
The study of the notion of truth, (epistemology, philosophy,
metaphysics, it is interdisciplinary) and theology.
Translation
Hi John Clark
Generating sets gets you nowhere unless you can also generate intelligence.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
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
Hi John Clark
Right. The problem with the Chinese Room argument
is that there is no way to generate a reasonable answer.
9/14/2012
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
On 13 Sep 2012, at 22:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 3:58:21 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com
wrote:
This is the symbol grounding problem pointed out by Searle's
Chinese Room
I've said it before
Hi John Clark
Thanks very much for your enlightening response.
My original and still surviving purpose was to provide a means of
dealing with but not mixing two different categories. Perhaps set theory
would be better, but I am clueless there.
However, the existence of brain waves and the
Hi John Clark
The difference is that a computer has no intelligence, cannot
deal with qualia, and is not alive.
My brain has all of these features in spades.
ibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:53, Roger Clough wrote:
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.
No. She just want to marry Jim. It is nice guy. She is glad that he
survived the brain transplant. She does not
Hi John Clark
You're a slow learner. Science deals with facts, religion deals with values.
So angular momentum and religion differ like apples and oranges.
Myths about numerical values would be unintelligible.
(Religious) values can only be taught and explained by myths and stories.
Bible
Hi Craig Weinberg
His very first sentence is wrong. Conscious experience is an expression of
nonphysical mind,
although it may deal with physical topics.
It is widely accepted that conscious experience has a physical basis.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
Leibniz would
Hi Craig Weinberg
Faith can be expressed as a belief, but faith itself is inner trust,
confidence, etc.
Faith
Noun:Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual
apprehension rather than proof.
Roger
Hi Alberto G. Corona
All religious beliefs are at the bottom unfounded.
So is the fact that you are real unfounded.
All scientific theories moreover are founded on assumptions,
which by definition are unfounded.
Need I go on ?
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
Leibniz
Hi Alberto G. Corona
Physicalism is founded on unfounded assumptions.
There is no physical certainly in this world.
Get over it.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the
Roger: right
But there are two types of people: the ones that know that believe,
that know that they are unfounded and the others that believe that
known, who don´t know that they are unfounded
2012/9/14 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net:
Hi Alberto G. Corona
All religious beliefs are at the
Scientific Faith: Science and nothing but-ism
Scientists commonly assume that if you develop
a theory and make a mesasurement that
produces the expected result, the
reason for that result is nothing-but your theory.
Right ? Maybe, maybe not. Two completely
different theories can predict the
Hi Bruno Marchal
My judgment was overly harsh if they transplanted
something living along with the computer transplant
or partial transplant. But it doesn't look too promising
that the result would even be alive.
I don't know why you keep imputing racism on me just
because I realistically
Hi Craig Weinberg
I agree. But I never say never.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Hi Craig Weinberg
Fortunately or unfortunately, capitalism is Darwinism, pure and simple.
So it can prepare for a better future, although it can be painful
at present. My own take on this is that there needs to be
a calculus of pleasure and pain. Jeremy Bentham suggested
perhaps an impfect one.
Hi Bruno Marchal
Objective things are things that can be measured (are extended) and so are
quantitative.
Numbers can apply. Science applies. Computers can deal with them.
Subjective things are inextended and so cannot be measured directly, at least,
nor dealt with by computers at least
Hi Bruno Marchal
IMHO in Platonia (the Eternal) all logical statements must always
be either true or false forever. However, in this everyday world, where time
is a factor, such necessary logical statements become contingent,
and may only sometimes be true. And possibly not everywhere.
The I
Hi John Clark
Faith is to me at least a virtue since it is associated with hope and love.
Religion is not faith. It is a social tradition of men.
Men-- you know-- whose lives can be natsy, brutish and short.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no
Hi Alberto G. Corona
That's why I stick to orthodoxy and the creeds.
Hard to go wrong that way.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/14/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From:
On 9/14/2012 4:02 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
There are different kinds of beliefs. The believer that has no strong
evidences, know that he believe. He know that he believe.
The second kind of believer does not know that he believe, because he
live in a environment where the evidences are
On 9/14/2012 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote:
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 [actually it is BRUNO]: Bad decision. You are
On 9/14/2012 4:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Brian,
On 13 Sep 2012, at 22:04, Brian Tenneson wrote:
Bruno,
You use B as a predicate symbol for belief I think.
I use for the modal unspecified box, in some context (in place of the
more common []).
Then I use it mainly for the box
On 9/14/2012 4:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 20:08, Stephen P. King wrote:
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
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:44, Roger Clough wrote:
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
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:44, Roger Clough wrote:
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
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Theology is a science.
It's a very strange science, it's a science that does not use the
scientific method and, not surprisingly, a science that has discovered
absolutely positively nothing about the nature of the universe
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Faith is to me at least a virtue since it is associated with hope and
love.
Faith is believing in something when there is absolutely no reason for
doing so; an optimist with faith would believe in things that fill him with
hope
On 9/14/2012 4:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Sep 2012, at 18:47, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
makes a bridge between two fields,
What two fields?
The study of the notion of truth,
On 9/14/2012 6:09 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi John Clark
Generating sets gets you nowhere unless you can also generate intelligence.
Hi Roger,
I agree. Defining differences without the means to comprehend those
differences is purely mechanical and not-intelligent.
Roger Clough,
On 9/14/2012 6:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi John Clark
Right. The problem with the Chinese Room argument
is that there is no way to generate a reasonable answer.
Hi Roger,
The Chinese room argument is flawed becuase it does not consider
the distinction of levels of meaningfulness.
On 14 Sep 2012, at 13:57, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
My judgment was overly harsh if they transplanted
something living along with the computer transplant
or partial transplant. But it doesn't look too promising
that the result would even be alive.
I don't know why you keep
On 9/14/2012 6:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 22:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 3:58:21 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
This is the symbol
On 9/14/2012 6:38 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi John Clark
The difference is that a computer has no intelligence, cannot
deal with qualia, and is not alive.
Dear Roger,
You are assuming ab initio that a computer has no capacity
whatsoever of reflecting upon its computations and to possible
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote:
Godel numberings are not unique.
True, there are a infinite number of ways you could do Godel numbering.
Thus there is no a single abslute structure of relations, there is an
infinity
And you can use any one of
On 9/14/2012 6:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:53, Roger Clough wrote:
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.
No. She just want to marry Jim. It is nice guy. She is glad that he
On 9/14/2012 7:05 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
His very first sentence is wrong. Conscious experience is an expression of
nonphysical mind,
although it may deal with physical topics.
It is widely accepted that conscious experience has a physical basis.
Dear Roger,
No, you
On Thu, Sept 13, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
The menu is not the meal.
In other words X is not X and that is perfectly true, use and mention are
indeed not the same, but they are closely related.
To my mind, the fact that you have particular animus toward the Chinese
On 9/14/2012 8:07 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Fortunately or unfortunately, capitalism is Darwinism, pure and simple.
So it can prepare for a better future, although it can be painful
at present. My own take on this is that there needs to be
a calculus of pleasure and pain. Jeremy
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote:
I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any
particular machine but there must be at least one physical system that can
implement a given computation for that computation to be knowable.
On 9/14/2012 8:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Objective things are things that can be measured (are extended) and so are
quantitative.
Numbers can apply. Science applies. Computers can deal with them.
Subjective things are inextended and so cannot be measured directly, at least,
On 9/14/2012 8:40 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
IMHO in Platonia (the Eternal) all logical statements must always
be either true or false forever. However, in this everyday world, where time
is a factor, such necessary logical statements become contingent,
and may only sometimes be
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote:
A have to side a bit with John here as the truthfulness of a concept
is different from the meaningfulness.
Yes they are different. 2+2=5 is meaningful but not truthful. 2+2=4 is
meaningful and truthful. Man has
On 9/14/2012 12:18 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Every belief system has a core and a set of pseudo logic, which is a
mix of pseudo arguments ad authoritas that justify their beliefs.
Positivsts have Phisics as its core, defence shield. From this,
almost everything else is derived. Because the
On 9/14/2012 9:04 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Alberto G. Corona
That's why I stick to orthodoxy and the creeds.
Hard to go wrong that way.
Hi Roger,
But you do so at the real risk of ossification. You stop asking
questions, thinking that I know all that can be known. This becomes
fear of
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:01:59 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers Absent Qualia, Fading
Qualia,
Dancing Qualia You should have a look at it first.
On 9/14/2012 11:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:44, Roger Clough wrote:
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
On 9/14/2012 6:10 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
The evidence has strong indications of being manipulated for the purpose of a
political agenda.
It is certainly cherry-picked by minions of the fossil fuel industry.
The way that the sensors are distributed and their data is weighed is the
The late Chris Lofting turned I Ching into a science and even was able
to derive Quantum Mechanics from it, at least what he considered to be
QM.
http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/newindex.html
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:40
On 9/14/2012 11:53 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Stephen P. King
stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net wrote:
Godel numberings are not unique.
True, there are a infinite number of ways you could do Godel numbering.
Hi John,
Yes, but my
On 9/14/2012 12:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King
stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net wrote:
I contend that universality is the independence of computations
to any particular machine but there must be at least one physical
On 14 Sep 2012, at 14:14, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Objective things are things that can be measured (are extended) and
so are quantitative.
Numbers can apply. Science applies. Computers can deal with them.
Subjective things are inextended and so cannot be measured directly,
On 9/14/2012 12:42 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Stephen P. King
stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net wrote:
A have to side a bit with John here as the truthfulness of a
concept is different from the meaningfulness.
Yes they are different.
On Friday, September 14, 2012 12:33:45 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:07 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Fortunately or unfortunately, capitalism is Darwinism, pure and simple.
So it can prepare for a better future, although it can be painful
at
Most people prefer working to looking for work.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, September 14, 2012 12:33:45 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:07 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Fortunately or unfortunately,
On 9/14/2012 1:10 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/14/2012 6:10 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
The evidence has strong indications of being manipulated for
the purpose of a political agenda.
It is certainly cherry-picked by minions of the fossil fuel industry.
I would agree with you if the fossil
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:25 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sept 13, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
The menu is not the meal.
In other words X is not X and that is perfectly true, use and mention
are indeed not the same, but they are closely
On 14 Sep 2012, at 16:00, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 4:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 20:08, Stephen P. King wrote:
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
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote:
On 9/14/2012 12:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote:
I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any
particular machine
On 14 Sep 2012, at 15:32, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote:
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.
On 14 Sep 2012, at 15:41, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 4:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Brian,
On 13 Sep 2012, at 22:04, Brian Tenneson wrote:
Bruno,
You use B as a predicate symbol for belief I think.
I use for the modal unspecified box, in some context (in place of
the more
On 9/14/2012 11:10 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 1:10 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/14/2012 6:10 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
The evidence has strong indications of being manipulated for the purpose of a
political agenda.
It is certainly cherry-picked by minions of the fossil fuel
On Friday, September 14, 2012 7:10:17 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Faith can be expressed as a belief, but faith itself is inner trust,
confidence, etc.
Faith
Noun:
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. Strong belief in God
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
You're a slow learner.
Maybe, but I'm smarter than the people in the Bible. As Bertrand Russell
said So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in
praise of intelligence.
Bible stories are generally
Russell:
wise words with one flaw: the US doesnot CHOOSE, people are 'trapped into'
especially now that ANY group can spend ANY sum to influence a choosing.
People are susceptible to persuasion - (true or false ones) and the White
House is fo sale.
I participated over the past 80 years in many
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
the human genome is at least 700Mb, but yeah it's not a lot.
Let's see, the human genome is about 3 billion base pairs long, there are 4
bases so each base can represent 2 bits and there are 8 bits per byte. That
comes
I have to say that it's interesting to see how nobody seems to agree on
everything here (on the everything list) but I find that everyone that I
disagree with most in one area, I seem agree with them most in another. Or
others who I disagree with slightly on everything but in unique balance.
On Friday, September 14, 2012 4:28:13 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
the human genome is at least 700Mb, but yeah it's not a lot.
Let's see, the human genome is about 3 billion base pairs long, there
On 9/14/2012 1:50 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, September 14, 2012 12:33:45 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:07 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Fortunately or unfortunately, capitalism is Darwinism, pure and
simple.
So it can prepare for
77 matches
Mail list logo
