Philosophy Now Forum

Turing set a criteria for computer experts. But the criteria is not the destination. The destination is somewhere down the road, So Turing's criteria is an important milestone and a difficult one. Turing's criterion is far more generic than most people realise and ties in directly into the scientif...

I knew it, you don't do "explain", ever. Claims. No justification. Case closed. EB Well, I keep asking you to define what you mean by "justification" and you keep refusing to define it! 30+ pages of references are CLEARLY not enough for you. When you state your objective criteri...

I guess you're terminally lost in translation. Even though I use your own language. The logic? What could that possibly be!!! :roll: Whatever gave you the idea that English is 'my own' language'? I SPEAK English. I don't THINK in English. Thought is my first language. And from what I've seen it's n...

the logic of human reasoning, and more fundamentally the logic of the human brain. THE logic? Which one is THE logic? The human brain invented so many logics... Ask your nice little computer to tell you what is the notion of logic common to all the definitions you just quoted above. Go on, it's a c...

Age wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:05 am What definition do you give to the word 'idealism'?

Somebody who blindly pursues ideas.

Like Truth.

Age wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:00 am "If language was NOT messy, then it would NOT work." Well that is one way to TRY TO "explain" and/or "justify" things to one's self.

You might come to my understanding too once you give up your idealism.

Age wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 10:56 am So, I took some thing you wrote out of context, by misreading it, and therefore, to you, I am spinning out of control and am also clueless. What else could I do but apologize?

Talk less. Read more.

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 9:24 am If you say so.

Q.E.D What I say is of no significance. Look at what/where I am pointing with my words.

Your inability to draw a distinction between me and Eodnhoj7 is a fact.

That is significant.

uwot wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 10:21 am Have I mentioned my book lately? It's loaded with heuristics. https://willybouwman.blogspot.com

You should totally start a thread about it!

The whole notion of formalism is an attempt to introduce form to the mess. Handy if you're a computer scientist, but it is unlikely to make the world and people any less messy. Well, kind of. The forms aren't meant to fix the world. The forms (models) are for your mind so you can cope with the mess...

Just to add to Scott's post, when Samuel Johnson wrote the first English dictionary he traveled the length and breadth of Britain to find out how words are used. He understood that you can't just impose a meaning and demand that everyone agrees with it. It is the context that defines a word, they a...

Nah, I think his best move is to make another alternate account, like he has with 'TimeSeeker' and 'Logik', so he can continue to validate himself as someone who's actually worth talking to. Well, maybe that's only the second best move; the best move would really be to find himself a good doctor wh...

Each time you REFUSE to answer my clarifying questions, the MORE you are REVEALING, about your REAL self. So what do you reveal about your REAL self when you refuse to define the words you are using? LOL I could have INFORMED you of this BEFORE we even began. Did you just come to this realization O...

But I have sufficiently defined the word 'Universe' FOR ME. And, that is ALL that really matters here. SO, I HAVE SUFFICIENTLY defined the word 'Universe'. That is not the kind of attitude one expects from somebody who is here to "learn to communicate". The definition is not FOR YOU. The ...

But the Truth IS I will ALWAYS use undefined words to define words. Would it even be possible to define words IN the word itself? Why are you asking me this if you know THE TRUTH? I HAVE ALREADY CLEARLY defined the word 'evidence'. Liar. You OBFUSCATED the word 'evidence' by referring to 'facts' an...