Re: Re: imaginary numbers in comp
Hi Stephen P. King I believe that all or much of the brain calculations are done aurally, phonetically. That has to be since we have to be able to understand and create vocal language. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/15/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-14, 11:52:52 Subject: Re: imaginary numbers in comp 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 be able to report on its meditation. You might say that you are intelligent exactly because you assume that you have this capacity. > > 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 content - > From: John Clark > Receiver: everything-list > Time: 2012-09-13, 13:15:54 > Subject: Re: imaginary numbers in comp > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > >> 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 your brain is "nothing but" a collection of molecules rigorously > obeying the laws of physics. > > ? John K Clark > > ? > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- Onward! Stephen http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: imaginary numbers in comp
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 Time: 2012-09-13, 12:11:51 Subject: Re: imaginary numbers in comp 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 'numbers which are fundamentally unlike numbers' which metaphorically can remind of us the contrast between logic and feeling. There are some interesting ways to use that and explore concepts like imaginary numbers with that in mind which I do think can yield worthwhile results when we unpack them and reapply them as metaphors for subjectivity. The problem is that arithmetic is the opposite of feeling. Machines are the opposite of living beings. Subjective numbers then are like a "Moon that treats the Sun like a Moon'. Craig On Thursday, September 13, 2012 11:45:53 AM UTC-4, 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 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 mental the imaginary part is the subjective part of the mental ? Isn't there an intuitive mathematics ? Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/YbsU-sTenVgJ. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: imaginary numbers in comp
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 content - From: John Clark Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-13, 13:15:54 Subject: Re: imaginary numbers in comp On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > 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 your brain is "nothing but" a collection of molecules rigorously obeying the laws of physics. ? John K Clark ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: imaginary numbers in comp
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 Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-13, 15:58:20 Subject: Re: imaginary numbers in comp On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > 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 course even the best of us can have a brain fart from time to time, but Searle baked this turd pie decades ago and apparently he still thinks its quite clever, and thus I can only conclude that John Searle is as dumb as his room.? ? John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
