Re: Numbers

From: John M <jamikes.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 12:48:23 -0800 (PST)

--- Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden> wrote:

>
>
> Le 17-mars-06, à 13:42, John M a écrit :
>
> >
> > to more recent posts:
> >
> > 1. do we have a REAL argument against solipsism?
> >(Our stupidity may allow also all the bad things
> >that "happen".)
>
> There is no REAL argument against solipsism.
> Nevertheless it is false, imo.

In my opinion, too, but it is irrelevant. If I really
CANNOT know, how can I trust my opinion or even yours,
who may be only the figment of my solipsism?
"Nevertheless" is no better argument than "I
think...". Worthless.
>
> So solipsism is false but irrefutable, like
> "inconsistency" in Pean
> Arithmetic. By this I mean you can add, to
> consistent formal theory of
> number as new axiom the axiom saying that the theory
> is inconsistent.

Peano was a wise man, for sure, I don't know much
about him or his math. BUT I dislike axioms, which are
the epitomes of our ignorance - like dogmata - to
believe.
>
> By Godel you will get a consistent theory. but that
> new theory will be
> unsound, it will proves the false proposition that
> the older theory is
> inconsistant, which it is not (by definition here).
>
> Amazing. Yes. Godel, lob's theorem are amazing. They
> show that in all
> number theories, there are plenty of non provable
> truth and irrefutable falsities.

I would not be so happy with Goedel and Loeb for such
characterization. It may point to their weaknesses. Of
course their worshipers assign those to their glory as
"amazing" rather than "questionable weak points". The
inconsistencies and uncertainties do not strengthen
the believability of a theory in my scrutinizing
opinion.
>
> >
> > 2.Is reasonable or rational thinking exclusive for
> > ONLY those, who live in a 'numbers' obsession?
> > or is it an elitist heaughtiness to look down to
> > all others, who do not share such obsession? - How
> > about vice versa?
> >
> > 3. Suppose the 'numbers based' worldview gains
> > universal approval (by ~3006?) - what will that
> help
> > in the betterment of the world? or even in the
> > betterment of human thinking? Or even of more
> > civil general life- conditions?
>
>
> My hope is that the humans will be able to preserve
> earth for the
> non-computationalist people. A sort of carbon-life
> museum.
> The "number obsessive" people will spread everywhere
> else, in the
> multimultimulti ... verse.
>
> But maybe a thorough computationalist (a la
> Plotinus) will know such a
> spreading is vain. A buddhist could perhaps be right
> by thinking that
> "artificial immortality" is just a way to perpetuate
> the Samsara, that
> is our terrestrial conditions, and that would let us
> never getting [into?] the Nirvana!

Bruno, you used an expression lately, which is
instrumental in my "narrative" world-view to make the
'origin' of this universe compatible to human logic:
you said "Inside View" (of this universe).
I made this a major point: the qualia of the 'knot' in
the invariant, infinitely symmetrical plenitude -
which promted this unverse - control the quality of
it, with the ideas that can evolve:
space/time/logic/life/etc.
So I would not 'bank' on 'spreading' definitely human
features into other universes with different qualia to
observe. "My" multiverse is multifaceted, (maybe?) of
different ideational compositions. I am with your
Buddhist friends, not necessarily 'terrestrial', but
our universe bound (not exclusive) exclusivity.

I still consider numbers and math (although did not
get any hint on 'math construct' vs. 'math theories')
a way of human thinking, not eclusively universal -
maybe not universally exclusive. No opposition here, I
am just agnostic. I don't close my possibilities
before I reach omniscience. (Not before next weekend's
philosophy).
>
> Bruno
>

Thanks for the reflection:
John

> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Mar 17 2006 - 16:06:35 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST