John M:
>To Searle's book-title: it implies that we already
>HAVE discovered what the 'mind' is. Well, we did not.
>At least not to the satisfaction of the advanced
>thinking community.
>
>John M
I think the name was a play the name of another book
"The discovery of the mind" by Bruno Snell
Se
Hi John,
Le 01-août-05, à 16:57, John M a écrit :
Also simulating menatlity from computer
expressions seems reversing the fact that in comp (AI
etc.) the computer science attempts to simulate
certain and very limited items we already discovered
from our "mind".
Except that since Turing, Churc
--- Lee Corbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Russell writes
>
> > John M. wrote
> >
> > > To Russell's 4 coordinates of (any?) event: how
> come
> > > the occurrence (event!) of a 'good idea' in my
> mind -
> > > (mind: not a thing, not a place, not
> time-restricted)
> > > should have t,x,y,z co
Aditya writes
> [LC]:
> > Well, Russell did also say that OMs and events seemed to him about as
> > alike as chalk and cheese. It's starting to look that way:
>
> > So, alas, it seems that the firmly established meanings of
> > "event" and "observer moment" can't really be said to be at
> > all th
To the quote of Lee's remark:
I would try "Vernumft" (which may as well be similarly
inaccurate for 'consciousness'). There were some
German speaking souls(!) who used it quite effectively
.
I try for'mind':the mentality aspect of the living
complexity which says not much more if 'mentality'
is
[LC]:
> Well, Russell did also say that OMs and events seemed to him about as
> alike as chalk and cheese. It's starting to look that way:
> So, alas, it seems that the firmly established meanings of
> "event" and "observer moment" can't really be said to be at
> all the same thing. (Folks like
[Lee wrote:]
>Interesting note about "mind": there is no German language
>equivalent for it. Another reason to be *very* careful when
>employing it. Teutonic zombies elided.>
>
>In a very deep (but non-mathematical) book, "What is Thought?"
>by Eric Baum, the author decides to use "mind" as the n
[Lee wrote:]
>Interesting note about "mind": there is no German language
>equivalent for it. Another reason to be *very* careful when
>employing it. Teutonic zombies elided.>
>
>In a very deep (but non-mathematical) book, "What is Thought?"
>by Eric Baum, the author decides to use "mind" as the n
Lee wrote:
>Interesting note about "mind": there is no German language
>equivalent for it. Another reason to be *very* careful when
>employing it. Teutonic zombies elided.>
>
>In a very deep (but non-mathematical) book, "What is Thought?"
>by Eric Baum, the author decides to use "mind" as the nam
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 08:09:46PM -0700, Lee Corbin wrote:
>
> Interesting note about "mind": there is no German language
> equivalent for it. Another reason to be *very* careful when
> employing it. Teutonic zombies elided.>
>
I am surprised about that! The word "der Geist" sprang immediate
Russell writes
> John M. wrote
>
> > I believe if we are up to identifying concepts with
> > common sense content as well, we should not restrict
> > ourselves into the model-distinctions of (any) physics
> > but generalize the meanings beyond such restrictions.
I agree: that is, so long as we c
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 02:00:30PM -0700, John M wrote:
> I salute Lee's new subject designation.
>
> I believe if we are up to identifying concepts with
> common sense content as well, we should not restrict
> ourselves into the model-distinctions of (any) physics
> but generalize the meanings be
I salute Lee's new subject designation.
I believe if we are up to identifying concepts with
common sense content as well, we should not restrict
ourselves into the model-distinctions of (any) physics
but generalize the meanings beyond such restrictions.
Of course: I am no physicist. My apologies.
13 matches
Mail list logo