On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 7:07 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Instead of yet another long winded vague metaphysical definition give >> me some examples of mechanism so I know what the hell you're talking about. >> Start by answering my simple clear yes or no questions. > > > > *I use “mechanism” as a short cut for “YD + CT” (yes doctor and the > Church-Turing hypothesis).* > *I use “digital machine” or “program” or “number” or “word” for what you > might mean by Mechanism.* > That's nice I'm happy for you; but how about answering my original questions with simple yes or no answers? Is a cuckoo clock a mechanism? Is a roulette wheel a mechanism? Is a Tritium atom with a half life of 12.32 years a mechanism? Is the multiplication table a mechanism? And if you're going to dodge the questions again at least have the common curtesy to think of a better excuse than "I din't know what a cuckoo clock is". *> A physical cuckoo clock is an informal poorly defined notion.* > Oh for christ sake, then *EVERYTHING *is a informal poorly defined notion. And actually that would be OK because fundamentally definitions are not important in language, examples are. > *> Or do you define a cuckoo clock by* [,,,] > That is the problem right there! You are always and forever talking about definitions as if they are somehow fundamental but they NEVER are. In any language including mathematics the parent of definition is ALWAYS example. Where do you think Euclid got the knowledge to white his definitions? Where do you think lexicographers got the knowledge to white their dictionaries? If you can't answer specific clear questions about what is and what is not a mechanism with either a yes or a no answer then you lack the tools to communicate deep philosophical ideas to your fellow human beings, you can't even tell them how to tie their shoes. > > *You will not find the expression “a mechanism” in any of my post.* > I know and that is exactly precisely the problem. You talk about mechanism constantly, and I mean CONSTANTLY, and yet you are unable to provide a single specific example of something that has that quality or single specific example of something that does not. And that means you literally don't know what you're talking about. *> A perfect definition of digital machine is* [...] > God damn it! I don't want yet another definition, perfect or otherwise, I want an EXAMPLE! The fact that you are unable to provide even one tells me that your ideas are so bad they're not even wrong. > >>> Is a roulette wheel a mechanism? Is a Tritium atom with a half life >>> of 12.32 years a mechanism? Is the multiplication table a mechanism? >> >> >> *>> If you define them in such a way that they are Turing emulable, then >> they are “mechanism”,* >> > *> With Mechanism, I have already ex^plained why no piece of matter is > ever Turing emulable*. > A roulette wheel is a piece of matter and so is a Tritium atom, so if "no piece of matter is ever Turing emulable" why did you say in the above they are Turing emulable? You've gotten so confused you've forgotten what you're confused about. *> I talk on “Mechanism”, the assumption that we can survive through a > physical digital body, with a generalised sense of body, * > You talk at great length about “Mechanism” in your posts and papers but in all that verbiage you admit you have never once talked about "a Mechanism", you can't supply even one specific example of what the hell you're talking about, you claim it's because you don't know what a cuckoo clock is but I think it's because you literally don't know what you're talking about. >> your definitions are useless > > > *> ?* > *! * *> Here is a machine* > *SKK* > *Here is a computation* > *SKKK * > *KK(KK)* > *K* > I see. So 3 squiggles is called a "machine" and 11 squiggles is called a " computation". That's nice I'm happy for you; but how about answering my original questions with simple yes or no answers? Is a cuckoo clock a mechanism? Is a roulette wheel a mechanism? Is a Tritium atom with a half life of 12.32 years a mechanism? Is the multiplication table a mechanism? > > *I don’t know what a cuckoo clock is.* > If the hole in your mental data base is really that huge then there is no way you can say anything of substance about science or philosophy. The first deep philosophical question you need to answer before you can have any hope of delving further into the realms of thought is "What is a cuckoo clock and is it a mechanism or is it not?". John K Clark -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0CKtDSHKnZdW9ujS017yvQ9M8O03ayfBNMiMSYjKhwvQ%40mail.gmail.com.
