I guess I don't understand how giving a human a deck of cards and a computer program and saying "run this program, but use this deck of cards instead of the array..." is different from "I said HUMANS cannot be told to follow an instruction set in the same manner a MICROPROCESSOR does. "...
I don't think that geometry is necessary.
We live in a universe that may have 11 dimensions, curves with gravity, and is extremely chaotic on the smallest levels. For that reason a geometric proof seems impractical. I wouldn't call geometry the language of our universe, maybe string theory or...
Not all proofs are mathy. I have basic logic, which is technically math, so if you want math use that.
My point is:
1) the entire universe is particles and constituents (GIVEN)
2) all information must state attributes of these particles (or something carried by turing completeness) if it...
Totally incorrect. I myself can read a computer program (to sort a deck of cards or whatever) and anybody else who knows that language can and will do it the same way.
I think you are assuming that experience isn't just chemical changes. When a computer memorizes this is just electromagnetic...
There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I was saying I didn't see how the photograph related to the point on communication. I think I understand now. I'd like to point out now that A language CAN be totally defined open to 1 interpretation only. This is done by programming languages. Even if...
1. As for Mr Turner's definitions they are irrelevant unless I am using them. As long as you know what I mean when I use each of those words then there is no issue.
2. Untrue. I'm sure that most people don't off-hand know how to explain such 'magical' things as shrooms, but all human...
Well what you say would be a problem except I'm not saying memorization of words is vital. The key is to be able to work it out afterwards and continue the debate even past and through a disagreement in definition.
A good example of working with any definition in a debate can be seen at...
You misunderstand.
I am not saying that no words are translatable between languages. I'm saying that almost every word is, but not certain erroneous words. These erroneous words (such as 'deserves') cannot be translated into terms about the basic constituents of the universe.
If you claim...
Summary
In short, all words only have the meanings that their definitions have.
All definitions must be tranlatable into statements about the basic universe constituents (since these are all that exist).
All biases towards a word only make sense if they are due to practical advantages of the...
Response
I am the author.
As for 'flaw in the language' I have changed that to 'flaw in the concept.' I propose that a concept that cannot be tranlated into terms of our universe's constituents is uninterpretable (and usage of such a concept could be considered 'flawed') and hence there is...
Science-iffication of philosophy. Solving questions such as "what is fair?"
The topic probably makes you think I'm crazy, and perhaps I am mistaken. The issue in all philosophy is semantic in nature and english distorts our ability to think. I have a method to solve these issues...
The topic probably makes you think I'm crazy, and perhaps I am mistaken. The issue in all philosophy is semantic in nature and english distorts our ability to think. I have a method to solve these issues:
http://www.orbular.com
Please only add to this thread if you have examined the...