Le 22-nov.-05, à 10:41, Jesse Mazer a écrit :
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>> George Levy writes:
>>
>>> Along the line of Jorge Luis Borges a blackboard covered in chalk
>>> contains the library of Babel (everything) but no information.
>>> Similarly a white board covered with ink also contains no
>>> information.
>>> Interestingly, information is minimized or actually goes to zero
>>> when the world is too large as the plenitude, or too small.
>>> Information is maximized when the world is neither too large nor too
>>> small. We live in a Goldilock world.
>>
>> Can we talk about knowledge or intelligence in a similar way? A rock
>> is completely stupid and ignorant. A human has some knowledge and
>> some intelligence (the Goldilocks case). God is said to be
>> omniscient: infinitely knowlegeable, infinitely intelligent. Doesn't
>> this mean that God is the equivalent of the blackboard covered in
>> chalk, or the rock?
>>
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>
> Hmm...but isn't it relevant that an omniscient being is only supposed
> to know all *true* information, while the blackboard covered in chalk
> or Borges' library would contain all sentences, both true and false?
> It's like the difference between the set of all possible grammatical
> statements about arithmetic, and the set of all grammatical statements
> about arithmetic that are actually true (1+1=2 but not 1+1=3).
>
> Jesse
I agree. It is a frequent confusion in the list.
Also, people can read the book by Grim "The Incomplete Universe" for a
case that omniscience alone (i.e. without omnipotence) is already
contradictory.
Grim, P. (1991). The Incomplete Universe. The MIT Press, Cambridge, USA
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
Received on Tue Nov 22 2005 - 06:17:50 PST