--- In squeak at yahoogroups.com, "jan ziak" <ziakjan at h...> wrote:
> what should i say, another delightful reaction by you.
> 
> On Fri, 23 May 2003 10:24:11 +0000, Sean Charles wrote
> > > you have paralized my questions by talking about something 
other...but 
> > > this
> > > was your aim i think.
> > >
> > Yes but not in a hostile way, my brain just shot off that way at 
the 
> > time.  From your original message I knew this was going to be 
> > Philosophy 101 for a while. ENJOY!
> > >
> > > my opinion is that God is one of the categories we recognize...
> > Hmmmmm.....what if you 'don't believe' in a 'god' as such. Does 
he 
> > still exist then? To whom does the term 'we' refer to, define 
> > terms...'we' is a notional grouping in *your* mind based upon 
*your* 
> > experiences. You cannot assume anything about anybody else's 
precise 
> > background, you can only rely upon common shared experiences. As 
I 
> > quite often say, "The trouble with averages is we are all 
individuals."
> > 
> 
> i ment, a lot of people above some age recognize that there is 
> something "hidden" in the nature and refer to this common term 
as: "god".
> 
> i do not know whether is still exists then - such a question is god-
like, i 
> am unable to answer it, its meaning is "hidden" to me. it is god ?
> 
> note: i do not believe in god (like christians do).
> 
> > >>>
> > >> I have never found a satisfactory answer as to *why* computers 
work.
> > >> Sure,  I know how they work, but *why* do they work. Anybody 
ever
> > > you are lucky if you think *how* computers work.
> > Believe me it's not *lucky*, it hurts my head every time I use 
one. 
> > Essentially, a computer is a device that allows / enables 
physical 
> > beings to manipulate the non-physical and then some! Ouch!!
> > 
> > > anyway "why" and "how" are
> > > just two words so there is surely no harm if we exchange 
the "why"
> > > with "how", or whatever word with whatever other word.
> > Oh boy oh boy oh boy! You can't just swap words around like that 
and 
> > expect it not to do harm! Next time I shake hands I shall 
say "Why 
> > do you do?" and see what happens.
> > 
> > Oranges pain dribble wobbly woobly frooboids. Dingo you never car 
> > marmalade???
> > 
> > That last sentence was in fact the opening line of UK national 
> > anthem but I just swapped words about. I am sure you understood 
that 
> > it was the UK national anthem didn't you. I am not going to 
> > eleborate further as that remark about being able to swap words, 
was,
> >  quite frankly, surprisingly dumb from a smart guy. Oh hell, I 
can't 
> > resist...words are only sounds attached to repetitive 
associations 
> > of experiences as you grow up. My son is 19 months and really 
> > getting the hang of talking now and it is a real eye-opener for 
me 
> > to see how he's piecing it all together. If I tell him that the 
door 
> > is called a grapefruit, consistently, he will (a) beleive me and 
(b) 
> > get me into trouble when he starts attending play-school!
> > 
> 
> i have never heard nor read the text of UK national anthem ...
> 
> > >
> > > i have read GEB too and must say that the impact was decisive. 
people who
> > > read that book usually end in the same way - wondering about 
the littlest
> > > things around them.
> > Yup! I've not been 'normal' since then! It is a profound book and 
I 
> > am glad that in my existence in this world I encountered it and 
> > understood large parts of it. I have my own copy and I always 
read a 
> > bit when I think life is getting dull! It can be a very 
unsettling book.
> > >
> > > i heard a professor on my university saying that he believes 
universe is
> > > discrete in its nature.
> > 
> > >
> > > people nowadays just "pass" cinemas by. but there were times, 
in the
> > > beginnings of cinematography, when people deeply wondered about 
how it 
> > > can be
> > > posible that they can see the past. philosophers have written 
essays
> > > concerning the god-like magic behind the process of filming and 
repetitive
> > > showing of the filmed. it has had something to do with time and 
space, 
> > > their
> > > interaction ....
> > Given that space-time is considered to be 'all there at once' and 
> > that we are merely 'moving through it', this is something that 
might 
> > come back to shock us all! I often freak out at rewinding the 
video, 
> > I mean, the timeline is going forward but the film is going 
> > backwards. Maybe if we all got together one day and brought a 
video 
> > each and all rewind it at the same time something quite profound 
> > might happen...and somebody can film the whole thing and play 
that 
> > backwards too to reset us all.
> > 
> > >
> > > there are cases in which i am unable to preciselly reproduce 
the numbers 
> > > i
> > > have obtained. as a said it is because i am not perfect (just 
like anyone
> > > else). you never enter the same river. development as such is a
> > > unidirectional process, it recurs but never repeats.
> > Hmmmmm. Depends what you mean here. You can *always* reproduce 
the 
> > numbers,  what you may not be able to reproduce is the process 
that 
> > generated them.  I think that's what you are trying to tell me!
> > 
> > Don't go too deep for an essentially simple process. Software is 
for 
> > the most part mechanistic (calm down everybody!) in that, if I 
write 
> > a function to return the sum of two numbers and hand it 2 and 2, 
I 
> > expect to see the result 4 every time, regardless of language or 
> > process. (Goidel, where are you!). I do agree however that there 
are 
> > environmental considerations; yesterday it worked, today the disk 
is 
> > full and it doesn't work. That's ok by me.
> > 
> > >
> > > does it matter after i have read what you have written 
above ....
> > Does any of it matter. Do we matter? What is matter?
> > 
> > >>> so, are we working with objects or just manipulating text ?
> > >>>
> > >> Yes and yes.
> > >>
> > >
> > > glass and glass. water and water. and and and. everything is 
nothing.
> > > (foolish, isn't it?) have we advanced ourselves?
> > OOOOooooooooh! Cheeky, you know what I meant (Ooops! Hoisted by 
my 
> > own petard!)...I simply meant that mentally, you are working with 
> > objects while physically it happens to be 'text'. Whatever that 
is. 
> > Sigh, I think I am losing it. What's it? Wotsit. A Cheesy snack.
> > 
> > >
> > > names do differentiate, but spatial position does also.
> > Agreed, but should you ever discover to a means to make two 
objects 
> > co-exist in the same space at the same time then you will be a 
rich 
> > man! Imagine a stack of oranges (don't anybody mention *that* 
> > mathematical problem, I think it was solved recently) and you 
want 
> > to green-grocer dude to give you the one from the middle. Surely 
by 
> > saying 'I want the one in the middle' you have attached a naming 
> > reference to that orange, sorry, thing you want to buy. You  
*must* 
> > name things. It all comes down to the minutae of the naming 
process. 
> > Even if you just wave hand signals for up, down, left-a-bit, grab 
it 
> > then those hand signals, in that sequence required to locate the 
> > goal fruit constitutes a 'name' albeit a very long winded and 
long 
> > one but a name nonetheless.
> > 
> > > Mescalin etc...
> > > thanks, but i will not try it.
> > Why not?> Look what it did for me! ;-)
> > 
> > Sean Charles.