Re: Reality, the bogus nature of the Turing test

From: Bruno Marchal <>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:59:09 +0200

Le 22-sept.-06, à 08:16, Russell Standish a écrit :

> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 04:16:53PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> Russell, when you say "nothing external exist", do you mean "nothing
>> primitively material" exist, or do you mean there is no independent
>> reality at all, not even an immaterial one? (I ordered your book but
>> I
>> am still waiting :)
>> Bruno
> The latter.

I am not sure this makes sense for me.

> To be more precise, I identify Nothing with
> undifferentiated form, a bit like the Chaos of the ancient Greeks.

OK but that is a big "Nothing".

> To
> be even more precise, I identify it with the zero information object,
> or
> the set of all strings.

That is bigger and bigger. This confirms my feeling that we should use
the axiomatic method, because terminology is confusing.

> Any person's experience is obtained by
> differentiating - selecting something from that "nothing".
> The relationship between this zero information object, and
> arithmetical platonia is a bit unclear, but I would say that anything
> constructible (Sigma_1) must be extractable from the zero information
> object.

OK then. But this means you are an arithmetical realist, and that an
external "reality" exist, for example your strings, or your set of
strings, and I am still more confused by your saying there is not even
an immaterial external reality, which would be solipsism with a


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Fri Sep 22 2006 - 09:00:46 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:12 PST