On 16 Aug 2012, at 18:45, Roger wrote:



Wow ! If true this would be the Holy Grail I've sought,

Well, you make me hoping it is true, then.


and the irony is that I could not understand what to do with it.

It is the major weakness. I just open a little bit a door in a new direction (or in a very old one, the platonist one), and show how to proceed from there, by studying a lot of math, which few people in the philosophy of mind field are ready to study, even the computationalists, and despite the obvious link between comp and computer science.

But you can also contemplate, and since recently, there are some feature you might even experiment, or better experience, if you are lucky enough to be in a free country, where you can test salvia divinorum. The Salvia experience seems to be able to sum up some of the most startling aspect of comp in less than 2 minutes. (Or you can move to do that, salvia is only illegal in less than 20 states and countries).

So the choice is perhaps between 40 years of math, or two minutes in the 'salvia space'. Note that some aspects of the salvia experience challenge, also, the comp hypothesis, but this is what makes it particularly interesting.

Of course it is "only an hallucination", but the experience can challenge the very meaning of what is an "hallucination", and what is "real". Unfortunately we live in a period where such experience are not well seen, but this is coherent with the way human so often disrespect themselves. Salvia is non toxic and non addictive (even anti-addictive: it is a cure to quit drugs), but the experience can be *quite* overwhelming if not quite shocking, especially for people who believe in total self-control, or in a too much literal idea of what is "real". Provocatively, some describes salvia as a cure to atheism!

If you try salvia, start from leaves and increment only with concentrated extracts slowly, with a sober sitter to minimize risk. The first thing most forget when trying salvia, is that they have taken salvia, and some people have some sleep-walking behavior. You can search "salvia" on youtube, but don't do like the young people there, who use salvia only to make a funny video, and give strong extracts to first timer, and eventually disgust them of it, if not of all psychedelic plants. For anyone interested in consciousness and spirituality, that plant is a godsend. It can be frustrating, as it gives a *lot* of new data, which are hard to swallow. To be sure, few people like it, but then most people dislike being challenged on their deepest conception of reality. To be clear, I have published all my work before trying salvia.

You can also train yourself in lucidity during sleep, notably the REM sleep. This is what I have done for many years. This can provide many informations too. Consciousness is private and individual, at first sight, and we are our own guinea pig.

Take care,

Bruno




Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/16/2012
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function."
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-08-15, 04:17:20
Subject: Re: Imprisoned by language (code)

Hi Roger,

On 14 Aug 2012, at 18:26, Roger wrote:

Hi Bruno Marchal

Well, I feel like Daniel must have felt when before the Giant.
And I can't even find a rock to sling.

Nevertheless, as I see it, computers are imprisoned by language (computer code). Like our social selves. But like Kierkegaard, I believe that ultimate truth
is subjective (can, like meaning, only be experienced).  Life
cannot truly be expressed or experienced in code.

No problem for comp here. We have discovered that machine, when looking inward tend to perceive, or experience many truth which are beyond words. There is a logic (S4Grz) which formalize at the meta- level that non-formalizable (at the ontological level) informal process of though. I wrote (and published) recently a paper on this, (the mystical machine, in french) but it is what I try to explain here since a long time. Machines have already a non formalizable (by themselves) intuition. Indeed self-referentally correct machine have a rich, neoplatonist-like, theology. On my url front page, you can download my paper on an arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus, made possible (and necessary in some sense) by computer science.

Bruno








Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/14/2012
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-08-12, 05:13:01
Subject: Re: Severe limitations of a computer as a brain model


On 11 Aug 2012, at 12:47, Roger wrote:

Hi Alberto G. Corona

Agreed. Computers are quantitative instruments and so cannot have a self or feelings, which are qualitative. And intution is non-computable IMHO.

Computer have a notion of self. I can explain someday (I already have, and it is the base of all I am working on).

Better, they can already prove that their self has a qualitative components. They can prove to herself and to us, that their qualitative self, which is the knower, is not nameable. Machines, like PA or ZF, can already prove that intuition is non-computable by themselves.

You confuse the notion of machine before and after G del, I'm afraid. You might study some good book on theoretical computer science. Today we have progressed a lot in the sense that we are open to the idea that we don't know what machine are capable of, and we can prove this if we bet we are machine (comp).

Bruno






Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/11/2012
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Alberto G. Corona
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-08-11, 04:08:29
Subject: Re: Where's the agent ? Who or what does stuff and is aware of stuff ?

The Dennet conception is made to avoid an agent in the first place because i so, it whould be legitimate to question what is the agent made of an thus going trough an infinite regression.

The question of the agent is the vivid intuition for which there are ingenious evolutionary explanations which i may subscribe. But a robot would implement such computations and still I deeply doubt about his internal notion oof self, his quialia etc. The best response to many questions for the shake of avooiding premature dogmatic closeness is to say "we don't know"

El 11/08/2012 07:57, "Stephen P. King" <stephe...@charter.net> escribi :
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> 牋 I have noticed and read your posts. Might you write some remarks about Leibniz' concept of pre-established harmony?
>
>
>
> On 8/10/2012 8:53 AM, Roger wrote:
>>
>> Hence I follow Leibniz, even though he's difficult and some say
>> contradictory. That agent or soul or self you have is your
>> monad, the only (alhough indirectly) perceiving/acting/feeling
>> agent in all of us, but currently missing in neuroscience and
>> neurophilosophy.
>
>
>
> --
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
> "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
> ~ Francis Bacon
>
> --
> 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 .

--
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 .

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- l...@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 .

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@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 .

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@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.

Reply via email to