Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
Nicola Musatti wrote: > Yet all these examples appear to me to be better explained as instances > of a form of physiological or psichological inertia than as indications > of the existence of some form of meta reality. But can you define "physiological or psychological inertia" in such a way that the term "meta reality" doesn't cover them, too? ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
Our psyche is formed by external forces, and only exists in interaction with them. (Our inner self is not separate from our external influences). As we are part of something bigger than ourselves, the death of our physical body is not an end to the 'psychological' forces that we perceive to be our 'self'. c.f. the research that Jung did to demostrate the common unconscious. (The individual psyche has it's roots in something much wider than the individual). All the best, Fuzzyman http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (U) wrote: >U> While preparing a Python411 podcast about classes and OOP, my mind >U> wondered far afield. I found myself constructing an extended metaphor >U> or analogy between the way programs are organized and certain >U> philosophical ideas. So, going where my better angels dare not, here is >U> the forbidden fruit of my noodling: >U> Spiritual Programming: >U> It seems to me that, if anything of a person survives death in any way, >U> it must do so in some way very different from that way in which we >U> exist now. >U> For now, we live in a temporal world, and once our body and brain >U> ceases to function, then our mind can no longer function in this >U> temporal world, and we cease to exist in this temporal world [snip] If you have a program running on a computer and the thing is too old to survive then you could dump its state to another computer and continue running there. Or you could archive the state for some time and resume it when it is convenient. I imagine that something similar would be possible with my state of mind. -- Piet van Oostrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
Peter Hansen wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > Life is a process, not a thing -- > > when a clock runs down and stops ticking, there is no essence of ticking > > that keeps going, the gears just stop. When I stop walking, there is no > > spirit of walk that survives me coming to a halt. I just stop walking. > > Yet when one listens to a clock or other repetitive sound for long > enough, when that sound stops one continues to hear a sort of > "after-image" of the sound. > > Somewhat like when someone sings a jingle and you just can't get it out > of your head: > > "plop plop fizz fizz, oh what a relief it is..." > > Perhaps something similar happens with the "ticking" that we call life, > and what happens after death: > > "plop plop fizz fizz, oh what a release this is..." I have an even more eerie (eerier?) example: I rememeber a family friend whose husband had recently died saying that she could still feel his presence about the house. Yet all these examples appear to me to be better explained as instances of a form of physiological or psichological inertia than as indications of the existence of some form of meta reality. More-platonic-than-pythonic-ly y'rs, Nicola Musatti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 19:05:04 -0500, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > I don't dare ask where your evidence for this hypothesis is, but I will > ask what are your reasons for imagining this? What is the chain of > thought that leads from: > > Step 1: We live in a temporal world. > > to: > > Step N: Our ghost/soul must therefore live in a timeless state. I can throw in some historical evidence against (assuming you accept the Gospels as historical, that is - at least they are documents). Christian doctrine paraphrased in the programming mindset is that this temporal world will be rebooted - destroyed and replaced with a "new heavens and new earth". The new earth will have time, but is purged of all evil. The goal of Christian practice is to cooperate with God as He cleans the wickedness out of our souls so that we can inhabit the new creation. The cleaning experience is not always pleasant. Taking a hard objective look at the "goodness" of your behaviour can be humbling and embarrassing. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Perhaps this is one reason why programmers are so passionate, and even > religious, about their programming tools; because they intuitively > sense that we are dealing with ideas that, however crudely, mirror > eternal realities of immense significance. While I don't associate any spiritual significance with programming, I do think that the choices we've made in the field of programming reflect deeply upon human cognition. A modern computer is a thoroughly abstract mathematical machine, so programmers can choose almost any abstraction to solve a problem. But it turns out that some abstractions fit our minds better than others, so programmers usually apply a small set of abstractions many times. So if we could categorize and chart the space of all programming abstractions that we have found most useful, we might learn a little about how our minds work. The research could be valuable for AI. Shane -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > While preparing a Python411 podcast about classes and OOP, my mind > wondered far afield. I found myself constructing an extended metaphor > or analogy between the way programs are organized and certain > philosophical ideas. So, going where my better angels dare not, here is > the forbidden fruit of my noodling: > > Spiritual Programming: > > It seems to me that, if anything of a person survives death in any way, > it must do so in some way very different from that way in which we > exist now. > > For now, we live in a temporal world, and once our body and brain > ceases to function, then our mind can no longer function in this > temporal world, and we cease to exist in this temporal world > > So, our current consciousness and awareness is a temporal one. We > experience the one way flow of time. We are not actually conscious of > any permanent thing, only of the changing world as time flows forward. > > In this sense, we are like the ghost in the machine of a computer > system running a computer program, or programs, written in a procedural > language and style. That is, the instructions in our program flow in a > linear sequence, with each instruction impacting and giving way to the > next instruction. Oh, there are the occasional looping structures, and > even the occasional out-of-left-field chaos causing go-to; but we > nevertheless experience all these things as linear and procedural. > > It seems apparent to me that , if anything of us survives it must do so > outside time, and any surviving consciousness could not experience the > same sort of temporal, linear, procedural existence of which we are now > aware. Oh, I can imagine a timeless essence of our "being" existing > timelessly but statically, observing the remnant of our "informational > holes" evolving and dissolving away in the temporal universe; but this > would be a cold survival after all, hardly worthy of the name. > > But perhaps there is a non-temporal world of eternity, that has > structures more reminiscent of higher order programming structures. So, > for instance, functional programming takes and builds upon its > procedural predecessors. So maybe our better, more re-useable parts, > that we develop in this temporal existence, are recycled into > functional units in a non-temporal world. There would still be a > direction of logic flow, but it would be a higher order reality than a > linear, procedural one. > > But beyond this perhaps we can imagine an object oriented world, one in > which the more functional, re-useable parts of people and things from > this lower, temporal world are re-packaged into objects containing both > functional methods and also parameters of state. These higher order > objects, and the relationships they form amongst themselves, can be > imagined to exist in a more timeless state than mere procedural > programs, or even functional ones, in that the complex object oriented > structures of such a timeless world would hold meaning even when viewed > as a whole, and not just when played linearly like a phonograph record. > > > There must be some higher order cognate of time, in this object > oriented world, but we are not able to conceive of it at this time. Our > awareness of existence in this higher order world would be very > different than our current awareness of linearly flowing time, but must > be more in the way of sensing the movements of meaning and > relationships amongst the informational matrices of this higher order, > object oriented universe. > > One can visualize a universe in which there are are an infinite number > of infinite dimensions, but these dimensions also keep expanding at an > infinite rate forever. This expansion could be thought of as the > cognate of time. Entities in this world could freely move back and > forth in any dimension, and could experience the totality of reality > all at once, but still experience the novelty of "time". > > I do not know how Aspect Oriented Programming fits into this picture, > if at all. But one can imagine higher orders of programming logic and > structure than OOP, whether AOP qualifies or some other, yet > undescribed programing paradigm. And, we do not know how many higher > layers of programming structure exist beyond our current technical > understanding. > > Perhaps this is one reason why programmers are so passionate, and even > religious, about their programming tools; because they intuitively > sense that we are dealing with ideas that, however crudely, mirror > eternal realities of immense significance. > > Ron Stephens > http://www.awaretek.com/python/index.html";>Python411 Podcast > Series AOP corresponds to a holographic worldview where each single object is in fact a composition and we obtain nonlocal correspondences between parts of the whole pattern. The aspects in an AOP program are the implicite order of a program that is weaved by aspects. The spiritual meaning is that of the gnostic believe in
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
> Apart from wishful thinking of course. That's always the major component > in any reasoning about the afterlife. Life is a process, not a thing -- > when a clock runs down and stops ticking, there is no essence of ticking > that keeps going, the gears just stop. When I stop walking, there is no > spirit of walk that survives me coming to a halt. I just stop walking. QOTYear! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In this sense, we are like the ghost in the machine of a computer > system running a computer program, or programs, written in a procedural > language and style. Makes sense - i heard that Steve Russell invented continuations after reading the Tibetan Book of the Dead. tom -- Chance? Or sinister scientific conspiracy? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > While preparing a Python411 podcast about classes and OOP, my mind > wondered far afield. I found myself constructing an extended metaphor > or analogy between the way programs are organized and certain > philosophical ideas. So, going where my better angels dare not, here is > the forbidden fruit of my noodling: Thanks for your thoughts on this. They give rise to some interesting lines of contemplation. David -- David Trudgett http://www.zeta.org.au/~wpower/ It is seldom that any liberty is lost all at once. -- David Hume -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Life is a process, not a thing -- > when a clock runs down and stops ticking, there is no essence of ticking > that keeps going, the gears just stop. When I stop walking, there is no > spirit of walk that survives me coming to a halt. I just stop walking. Yet when one listens to a clock or other repetitive sound for long enough, when that sound stops one continues to hear a sort of "after-image" of the sound. Somewhat like when someone sings a jingle and you just can't get it out of your head: "plop plop fizz fizz, oh what a relief it is..." Perhaps something similar happens with the "ticking" that we call life, and what happens after death: "plop plop fizz fizz, oh what a release this is..." -Peter ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 13:38:47 -0800, UrsusMaximus wrote: > >> It seems to me that, if anything of a person survives death in any way, >> it must do so in some way very different from that way in which we >> exist now. > [snip] > > I don't dare ask where your evidence for this hypothesis is, but I will > ask what are your reasons for imagining this? What is the chain of thought > that leads from: > > Step 1: We live in a temporal world. > > to: > > Step N: Our ghost/soul must therefore live in a timeless state. > > ? > > Apart from wishful thinking of course. That's always the major component > in any reasoning about the afterlife. Life is a process, not a thing -- > when a clock runs down and stops ticking, there is no essence of ticking > that keeps going, the gears just stop. When I stop walking, there is no > spirit of walk that survives me coming to a halt. I just stop walking. > > Wishful thinking is only 1 part. Historically, a big part of the hypothesis of an afterlife is control. As in, "you peasants must obey, and suffer your difficult lives because you will be rewarded after death." An even more fundamental reason is that certain belief systems are viral - in that they are self-perpetuating. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
"The highest activities of consciousness have their origins in the physical occurrences of the brain just as the loveliest of melodies are not too sublime to be expressed by notes."--Somerset Maugham -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 13:38:47 -0800, UrsusMaximus wrote: > It seems to me that, if anything of a person survives death in any way, > it must do so in some way very different from that way in which we > exist now. [snip] I don't dare ask where your evidence for this hypothesis is, but I will ask what are your reasons for imagining this? What is the chain of thought that leads from: Step 1: We live in a temporal world. to: Step N: Our ghost/soul must therefore live in a timeless state. ? Apart from wishful thinking of course. That's always the major component in any reasoning about the afterlife. Life is a process, not a thing -- when a clock runs down and stops ticking, there is no essence of ticking that keeps going, the gears just stop. When I stop walking, there is no spirit of walk that survives me coming to a halt. I just stop walking. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
There are many ways of going crazy, but the most valuable of them is this one which makes a genius out of an ordinary man. Claudio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > While preparing a Python411 podcast about classes and OOP, my mind > wondered far afield. I found myself constructing an extended metaphor > or analogy between the way programs are organized and certain > philosophical ideas. So, going where my better angels dare not, here is > the forbidden fruit of my noodling: > > Spiritual Programming: > > It seems to me that, if anything of a person survives death in any way, > it must do so in some way very different from that way in which we > exist now. > > For now, we live in a temporal world, and once our body and brain > ceases to function, then our mind can no longer function in this > temporal world, and we cease to exist in this temporal world > > So, our current consciousness and awareness is a temporal one. We > experience the one way flow of time. We are not actually conscious of > any permanent thing, only of the changing world as time flows forward. > > In this sense, we are like the ghost in the machine of a computer > system running a computer program, or programs, written in a procedural > language and style. That is, the instructions in our program flow in a > linear sequence, with each instruction impacting and giving way to the > next instruction. Oh, there are the occasional looping structures, and > even the occasional out-of-left-field chaos causing go-to; but we > nevertheless experience all these things as linear and procedural. > > It seems apparent to me that , if anything of us survives it must do so > outside time, and any surviving consciousness could not experience the > same sort of temporal, linear, procedural existence of which we are now > aware. Oh, I can imagine a timeless essence of our "being" existing > timelessly but statically, observing the remnant of our "informational > holes" evolving and dissolving away in the temporal universe; but this > would be a cold survival after all, hardly worthy of the name. > > But perhaps there is a non-temporal world of eternity, that has > structures more reminiscent of higher order programming structures. So, > for instance, functional programming takes and builds upon its > procedural predecessors. So maybe our better, more re-useable parts, > that we develop in this temporal existence, are recycled into > functional units in a non-temporal world. There would still be a > direction of logic flow, but it would be a higher order reality than a > linear, procedural one. > > But beyond this perhaps we can imagine an object oriented world, one in > which the more functional, re-useable parts of people and things from > this lower, temporal world are re-packaged into objects containing both > functional methods and also parameters of state. These higher order > objects, and the relationships they form amongst themselves, can be > imagined to exist in a more timeless state than mere procedural > programs, or even functional ones, in that the complex object oriented > structures of such a timeless world would hold meaning even when viewed > as a whole, and not just when played linearly like a phonograph record. > > > There must be some higher order cognate of time, in this object > oriented world, but we are not able to conceive of it at this time. Our > awareness of existence in this higher order world would be very > different than our current awareness of linearly flowing time, but must > be more in the way of sensing the movements of meaning and > relationships amongst the informational matrices of this higher order, > object oriented universe. > > One can visualize a universe in which there are are an infinite number > of infinite dimensions, but these dimensions also keep expanding at an > infinite rate forever. This expansion could be thought of as the > cognate of time. Entities in this world could freely move back and > forth in any dimension, and could experience the totality of reality > all at once, but still experience the novelty of "time". > > I do not know how Aspect Oriented Programming fits into this picture, > if at all. But one can imagine higher orders of programming logic and > structure than OOP, whether AOP qualifies or some other, yet > undescribed programing paradigm. And, we do not know how many higher > layers of programming structure exist beyond our current technical > understanding. > > Perhaps this is one reason why programmers are so passionate, and even > religious, about their programming tools; because they intuitively > sense that we are dealing with ideas that, however crudely, mirror > eternal realities of immense significance. > > Ron Stephens > http://www.awaretek.com/python/index.html";>Python411 Podcast > Series > -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Spiritual Programming (OT, but Python-inspired)
While preparing a Python411 podcast about classes and OOP, my mind wondered far afield. I found myself constructing an extended metaphor or analogy between the way programs are organized and certain philosophical ideas. So, going where my better angels dare not, here is the forbidden fruit of my noodling: Spiritual Programming: It seems to me that, if anything of a person survives death in any way, it must do so in some way very different from that way in which we exist now. For now, we live in a temporal world, and once our body and brain ceases to function, then our mind can no longer function in this temporal world, and we cease to exist in this temporal world So, our current consciousness and awareness is a temporal one. We experience the one way flow of time. We are not actually conscious of any permanent thing, only of the changing world as time flows forward. In this sense, we are like the ghost in the machine of a computer system running a computer program, or programs, written in a procedural language and style. That is, the instructions in our program flow in a linear sequence, with each instruction impacting and giving way to the next instruction. Oh, there are the occasional looping structures, and even the occasional out-of-left-field chaos causing go-to; but we nevertheless experience all these things as linear and procedural. It seems apparent to me that , if anything of us survives it must do so outside time, and any surviving consciousness could not experience the same sort of temporal, linear, procedural existence of which we are now aware. Oh, I can imagine a timeless essence of our "being" existing timelessly but statically, observing the remnant of our "informational holes" evolving and dissolving away in the temporal universe; but this would be a cold survival after all, hardly worthy of the name. But perhaps there is a non-temporal world of eternity, that has structures more reminiscent of higher order programming structures. So, for instance, functional programming takes and builds upon its procedural predecessors. So maybe our better, more re-useable parts, that we develop in this temporal existence, are recycled into functional units in a non-temporal world. There would still be a direction of logic flow, but it would be a higher order reality than a linear, procedural one. But beyond this perhaps we can imagine an object oriented world, one in which the more functional, re-useable parts of people and things from this lower, temporal world are re-packaged into objects containing both functional methods and also parameters of state. These higher order objects, and the relationships they form amongst themselves, can be imagined to exist in a more timeless state than mere procedural programs, or even functional ones, in that the complex object oriented structures of such a timeless world would hold meaning even when viewed as a whole, and not just when played linearly like a phonograph record. There must be some higher order cognate of time, in this object oriented world, but we are not able to conceive of it at this time. Our awareness of existence in this higher order world would be very different than our current awareness of linearly flowing time, but must be more in the way of sensing the movements of meaning and relationships amongst the informational matrices of this higher order, object oriented universe. One can visualize a universe in which there are are an infinite number of infinite dimensions, but these dimensions also keep expanding at an infinite rate forever. This expansion could be thought of as the cognate of time. Entities in this world could freely move back and forth in any dimension, and could experience the totality of reality all at once, but still experience the novelty of "time". I do not know how Aspect Oriented Programming fits into this picture, if at all. But one can imagine higher orders of programming logic and structure than OOP, whether AOP qualifies or some other, yet undescribed programing paradigm. And, we do not know how many higher layers of programming structure exist beyond our current technical understanding. Perhaps this is one reason why programmers are so passionate, and even religious, about their programming tools; because they intuitively sense that we are dealing with ideas that, however crudely, mirror eternal realities of immense significance. Ron Stephens http://www.awaretek.com/python/index.html";>Python411 Podcast Series -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
