On 10 Feb 2013, at 21:15, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:49:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Feb 2013, at 02:04, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, February 9, 2013 6:54:38 PM UTC-5, Kim Jones wrote:
What an extraordinarily interesting idea, Craig! I'll have to let
Brian Eno know about this. Eno was recently talking about the
possibilities of a new kind of "inaudible music". Actually, John
Cage already "invented" that in the '50s with his infamous piece
"4'.33" " - where the pianist walks to the keyboard, sits there for
4 minutes and 33 seconds (without playing anything) and then gets
up and leaves. The "music" is in fact all the little reactionary
giggles, guffaws, sighs etc. of the audience's outraged reaction.
Also the tweets of the little birdies in the trees outside etc. It
qualifies as music because each and every performance of 4'. 33" is
different. The environment interprets the score; the performer is
merely the catalyst. And I can assure you, good old John Cage was
no stranger to the odd hallucinogenic experience.
Yes, I'm familiar with all of that. The history of art and music is
full of conceptual provocations, from Malevich to Duchamp,
Shoenberg to Zappa. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LACCAF04wSs
While I agree that these can be very interesting and imaginative,
they hardly disprove my point. Music is in no danger of being
replaced by silent representations of music.
Can we encode the music of silence in binary?
We can't encode any music in binary, we can only encode
instructions for an instrument to stimulate human ears in a way
that we find musical, or silent.
OK. But then if you accept this for music, why not accept it for math.
I don't deny the richness of math beyond the associated symbols, nor
do I deny the pervasiveness of its reach. I only say that is a
motive of sense, not a generative source of sense or motive. As rich
as math is though, it is one layer deep. Its power derives
especially from the constraint on quality and interiority. I think
the problem with comp is that it mistakes this lowest denominator
uniformity for an essence, when in fact it is the very inversion of
essence: it is the essence of the existential void - the default,
the test pattern. The actual essence is in the fertility of direct
participation, of significance and motive. By betting on comp, we
bet on insignificance and entropy.
You beg the question. People can agree on elementary arithmetic, but
we still miss a notion of motive and sensory on which we can agree.
You cannot make strong negative statement (like machine can't think)
from a vague theory which refer to your personal experience. It looks
like a form of racism, as we have already discussed.
Smullyan said it well. Those who strongly believe that machines are
necessarily idiot will take comp as an insult. Those who believe in
their own intelligence/consciousness will take comp as a machine
apology. Betting on comp, for almost all our descendant, will be a bet
in a technology allowing to visit Mars in less than 4 minutes. They
will not believe that this make them insignificant. There is just no
reason, beyond *your* negative intuition about them.
Bruno
Craig
Bruno
Craig
Kim
On 09/02/2013, at 10:45 AM, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>
wrote:
If music were just an audible math though, then people should
enjoy watching oscilloscope renditions of songs with no sound as
much as they do listening to them.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
