Search found 963 matches

by Speakpigeon
Sun May 19, 2019 5:58 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

You are not understanding me. I did not claim that the brain IS a computer. I do not make ontological claims of any kind. I claimed that the brain DOES computation. Sure, that's your claim. It's a principle and not empirically verified. I don't think it's even anything like a scientific claim, i.e....
by Speakpigeon
Sun May 19, 2019 5:53 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

Your claim, however, is without foundation. It's based on a principle. I'm looking for serious attempt to emulate human logic, even flawed ones. In 2019 we have self-driving cars, self-flying airplanes. Facial and voice recognition systems. Machine learning algorithms which excel at tasks which use...
by Speakpigeon
Sun May 19, 2019 5:40 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

You still missing the point. I'm trying to see if any mathematician today tries to model human logic as Boole and Frege thought they were doing. We clearly come from very different philosophical foundations here. The very process of modeling is human logic IN ACTION. The EXPRESSION of human logic. ...
by Speakpigeon
Sun May 19, 2019 5:10 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

I already told you. The standard is the human mind. Ok, but "the mind" is not an ontological entity of any kind. It's an emergent phenomenon. Minds are what brains DO. Absolutely, but brains aren't any ontological entity either, certainly not as far as anyone seems to know. Still, for all practical...
by Speakpigeon
Fri May 17, 2019 5:40 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

Well, there are no esaping the epistemic problem of criterion here. Could you verbalize your notions of 'correctness' and 'incorrectness' when it comes to 'accurate descriptions of human logic'. What is your referent for 'correctness'? I already told you. The standard is the human mind. We only hav...
by Speakpigeon
Fri May 17, 2019 11:28 am
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

They don't have to. It was just the sense of my question. Ok, but then the criteria for whether somebody is working on "human logic" are born entirely out of your own, subjective, expectations. I'm fine with that. When you choose to walk through a door rather than through the wall, it's entirely ou...
by Speakpigeon
Wed May 15, 2019 4:53 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

I guess the criterion is rather simple: Do these people make any explicit and unambiguous claim to be working on human logic? Why do they have to be explicit about it? They don't have to. It was just the sense of my question. Logic (studying or applying) is a profoundly human activity and so I cann...
by Speakpigeon
Tue May 14, 2019 12:16 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

Would you say that working on the foundations of Logic meets your criterion for "working on logic as a human capacity"? Every one of the names I mentioned above worked on foundations. Nah. Doesn't carry any water. Clearly, whatever the name of a theory, some people at some point have to work on the...
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 8:39 pm
Forum: Philosophy of Mind
Topic: What is a Soul?
Replies: 45
Views: 1984

Re: What is a Soul?

Gary Childress wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 8:06 pm
OK. Fair enough. You win. All the evidence points to there not being such a thing as a soul. There is evidence for the absence of a soul, because absence of evidence is evidence of absence. How does that sound? Did I get it right?
The evidence seems tampered with.
EB
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 7:56 pm
Forum: Metaphysics
Topic: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'
Replies: 52
Views: 1755

Re: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'

If metaphysics is simple explain to me the Law of Identity. Or the question in my other thread: If time doesn't exist, then what keeps two clocks, that have been properly synchronised at some point, synchronised over any period of time? For an answer to the first question I'd need to know how you i...
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 5:46 pm
Forum: Metaphysics
Topic: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'
Replies: 52
Views: 1755

Re: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'

If metaphysics is simple explain to me the Law of Identity.

Or the question in my other thread: If time doesn't exist, then what keeps two clocks, that have been properly synchronised at some point, synchronised over any period of time?
EB
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 5:17 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: Any science of logic?
Replies: 105
Views: 3238

Re: Any science of logic?

That's probably all very interesting but I don't see where your reply connects with the crucial point in my post, that of logic as a human capacity. I am not sure I see the disconnect you see. Are Frege, Boole, Russel and Voyevodsky not human? In what capacity (if not human) would you say they were...
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 4:53 pm
Forum: Metaphysics
Topic: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'
Replies: 52
Views: 1755

Re: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'

Nāgārjuna's major thematic focus is the concept of śūnyatā (translated into English as "emptiness") which brings together other key Buddhist doctrines, particularly anātman "not-self" and pratītyasamutpāda "dependent origination", to refute the metaphysics of some of his contemporaries. For Nāgārju...
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 4:41 pm
Forum: Metaphysics
Topic: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'
Replies: 52
Views: 1755

Re: Metaphysics is Not 'Beyond Physics'

Not quite. It's the semantic analysis of our notion of being: No bachelor is a married man, therefore, no married man is a bachelor. That sorts of things. Your expression "the study of what exists" makes metaphysics a kind of physics. To study what exists, you need to know something about it. Physi...
by Speakpigeon
Mon May 13, 2019 4:11 pm
Forum: Philosophy of Mind
Topic: What is a Soul?
Replies: 45
Views: 1984

Re: What is a Soul?

[I did look it up. As far as I can tell, my statement stands. Then, explain from said definition why evidence that somebody committed a crime implies it's true this person committed the crime in question. Did you see the word "necessarily" and how it was used in my sentence? :? Yes. And when I say ...