Infinte Regress Timeline...

[ryan]

Everything is a part of something bigger.

Okay, then imagine isolating the entire system that is required for an equation to exist and have meaning. Again it will be 4 dimensional; not all of it exists at once. It requires inputs from the environment. It is something that exists in the universe; it is out there.

So what?

Whether or not an equation and models exist in nature is what this whole argument has been about. They do not need to be some kind of mental phenomena that exists only by our creation.

I am going to say "equation" in the singular sense because that is how the universe behaves. So it is redundant to specify what an equation is because everything is one side of an equation through time.

We observe the present - whatever the hell this we/consciousness is - and we happened to observe equations and remember what they are. The equation and models are samples of the universe. If we know enough of them, we will know everything there is to know about the universe.

 

[Juma]

So what?

Whether or not an equation and models exist in nature is what this whole argument has been about. They do not need to be some kind of mental phenomena that exists only by our creation.

I am going to say "equation" in the singular sense because that is how the universe behaves. So it is redundant to specify what an equation is because everything is one side of an equation through time.

We observe the present - whatever the hell this we/consciousness is - and we happened to observe equations and remember what they are. The equation and models are samples of the universe. If we know enough of them, we will know everything there is to know about the universe.

The models that make the base of how we experience the reality is not "remembered" or "learned" they are selected by the evolution. The higer level models we conciously builfd upon them is heavily depending on them and utterly meaningless wihout them.

 

[ryan]

Whether or not an equation and models exist in nature is what this whole argument has been about. They do not need to be some kind of mental phenomena that exists only by our creation.

I am going to say "equation" in the singular sense because that is how the universe behaves. So it is redundant to specify what an equation is because everything is one side of an equation through time.

We observe the present - whatever the hell this we/consciousness is - and we happened to observe equations and remember what they are. The equation and models are samples of the universe. If we know enough of them, we will know everything there is to know about the universe.

The models that make the base of how we experience the reality is not "remembered" or "learned" they are selected by the evolution. The higer level models we conciously builfd upon them is heavily depending on them and utterly meaningless wihout them.

Evolution is just a result of the physical behaviour of matter.

 

[Juma]

The models that make the base of how we experience the reality is not "remembered" or "learned" they are selected by the evolution. The higer level models we conciously builfd upon them is heavily depending on them and utterly meaningless wihout them.

Evolution is just a result of the physical behaviour of matter.

Yes. And your point is? (How would it be ig you stated your point yourself in your posts so I dont have to ask for them each single fucking time...)

 

[ryan]

Evolution is just a result of the physical behaviour of matter.

Yes. And your point is? (How would it be ig you stated your point yourself in your posts so I dont have to ask for them each single fucking time...)

You might as well have said that models exist because matter changes according to laws of physics instead of bringing up evolution.

 

[Juma]

Yes. And your point is? (How would it be ig you stated your point yourself in your posts so I dont have to ask for them each single fucking time...)

You might as well have said that models exist because matter changes according to laws of physics instead of bringing up evolution.

No. Because evolution is the actual mechanism that is needed for predicting agents to come into existence.

 

[ryan]

You might as well have said that models exist because matter changes according to laws of physics instead of bringing up evolution.

No. Because evolution is the actual mechanism that is needed for predicting agents to come into existence.

Evolution is just another way to say that we exist the way we do because of the laws of physics. You are convoluting everything by bringing up this area of study that is just an intermediate step between physics and cognitive science. It's pointless to bring it up.

 

[Juma]

No. Because evolution is the actual mechanism that is needed for predicting agents to come into existence.

Evolution is just another way to say that we exist the way we do because of the laws of physics. You are convoluting everything by bringing up this area of study that is just an intermediate step between physics and cognitive science. It's pointless to bring it up.

No. Because it explains the relationship between mind and reality. It proves you wrong: the only thing that matters of the models is the predictions. There inner structur (logic, equations etc) doesnt. Thus the inner workings if the models has no counterpart "out there".

 

[ryan]

Evolution is just another way to say that we exist the way we do because of the laws of physics. You are convoluting everything by bringing up this area of study that is just an intermediate step between physics and cognitive science. It's pointless to bring it up.

No. Because it explains the relationship between mind and reality. It proves you wrong: the only thing that matters of the models is the predictions. There inner structur (logic, equations etc) doesnt. Thus the inner workings if the models has no counterpart "out there".

I feel like you are saying that minds can intervene in the ecosystem, which is basically like a human agency argument. That's fine as a philosophical theory. If you assume that the mind is special and reacts with the ecosystem instead of being a part of it, then that's fine, and the discussion ends.

If you aren't saying that, then I think that you are singling the mind out of the ecosystem unjustifiably without realizing it.

 

[Juma]

No. Because it explains the relationship between mind and reality. It proves you wrong: the only thing that matters of the models is the predictions. There inner structur (logic, equations etc) doesnt. Thus the inner workings if the models has no counterpart "out there".

I feel like you are saying that minds can intervene in the ecosystem, which is basically like a human agency argument. That's fine as a philosophical theory. If you assume that the mind is special and reacts with the ecosystem instead of being a part of it, then that's fine, and the discussion ends.

If you aren't saying that, then I think that you are singling the mind out of the ecosystem unjustifiably without realizing it.

I do neither.

 

[ryan]

I feel like you are saying that minds can intervene in the ecosystem, which is basically like a human agency argument. That's fine as a philosophical theory. If you assume that the mind is special and reacts with the ecosystem instead of being a part of it, then that's fine, and the discussion ends.

If you aren't saying that, then I think that you are singling the mind out of the ecosystem unjustifiably without realizing it.

I do neither.

Think about my point this way.

Imagine aliens have been studying everything on Earth for millions of years up until now. They wouldn't notice the difference between mind and matter. Everything would just be a natural evolution of matter like it is on Jupiter or Mars. Processes interact and change whether it be an ecosystem or an abiotic environment. They may not think the life on the planet is anymore interesting than the waves in the ocean.

They may see a process that we know as 5 + 6 = 11 and not care that is being carried around in a brain.

My point is that an equation is a natural process just like anything else is.

 

[Juma]

an equation is a natural process just like anything else is.

Yes. So?

 

[ryan]

an equation is a natural process just like anything else is.

Yes. So?

How would you convince the aliens that the equation is not out there but other things are? The aliens would look at the process/equation like they look at other processes.

 

[Juma]

Yes. So?

How would you convince the aliens that the equation is not out there but other things are? The aliens would look at the process/equation like they look at other processes.

Do you have a remote idea what a computer program is? If so: have you heard anything about datatypes? They exist as binary states, and thus in "out there". But they only "come to life" within the running process.

So. Get it?

 

[ryan]

How would you convince the aliens that the equation is not out there but other things are? The aliens would look at the process/equation like they look at other processes.

Do you have a remote idea what a computer program is? If so: have you heard anything about datatypes? They exist as binary states, and thus in "out there". But they only "come to life" within the running process.

So. Get it?

This does not address my post. The aliens would see this process among many other processes; they would see the equation.

 

[Juma]

Do you have a remote idea what a computer program is? If so: have you heard anything about datatypes? They exist as binary states, and thus in "out there". But they only "come to life" within the running process.

So. Get it?

This does not address my post. The aliens would see this process among many other processes; they would see the equation.

So, you, did, not, get , it....

 

[ryan]

This does not address my post. The aliens would see this process among many other processes; they would see the equation.

So, you, did, not, get , it....

Are you saying that these data types cannot be observed by the aliens?

 

[Juma]

So, you, did, not, get , it....

Are you saying that these data types cannot be observed by the aliens?

No. Why would I say such a thing?

 

[ryan]

Are you saying that these data types cannot be observed by the aliens?

No. Why would I say such a thing?

Ahh, did you read my post? Because, I have absolutely no idea what that had to do with it.

 

[Juma]

No. Why would I say such a thing?

Ahh, did you read my post? Because, I have absolutely no idea what that had to do with it.

I give up.