Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 14363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:01 pm A program cannot pick "x" assertions out of a limitless expanse of assertions.
Neither can you. Produce them limitless options from which to pick from.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:01 pm A computer cannot reinterpret 1+1=2 as equivocating to a variety of things, yet a human being can.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing)
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:06 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:01 pm A program cannot pick "x" assertions out of a limitless expanse of assertions.
Neither can you. Produce them limitless options from which to pick from.






Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:01 pm A computer cannot reinterpret 1+1=2 as equivocating to a variety of things, yet a human being can.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing)
I can equivocate 1+1=2 to anything from a set of bears, to a set of mirrors, to a thought about a thought, to a set of chimnies simply by replicating what I assume in front of me. My ability to assume an ever present continuum of changes presents itself as limitless options considering now is continually changing. A computer cannot interpret now except through a framework of reasoning given now manifests through a series of ever changing frameworks of reasoning. It (the computer) cannot exist without a framework of reasoning, a human being can. I can assume "now" for what it is without a framework of reasoning, a computer cannot.



1. The limitless expanse of assertions is derived through an ever present now where a phenomena is observed through an ever changing set of rules. At best AI replicates rules, it does not create them. It rules are derived from the programmer which determines them. These rules are the boundaries through which something manifests, the "how" determines the "what". Art produced by AI is determined by the rules the programmer applied, not rules chosen by the AI itself. Even if an AI where to choose which rules it follows these rules selected would be determined by a program developed by the programmer, something the AI did not create.

2. A computer cannot equivocate 1+1=2 as equivocating to a set of horses, then bees, then points. It cannot create a series of imagined phenomenon to which 1+1=2 equivocates. A computer cannot imagine outside of it's own program. For example Google the 9 point problem. The problem is nine dots connected by a series of a number of lines, in order to connect the dots by the lowest number of lines possible one must draw lines which exists outside the framework of the dots. A computer cannot leave its own framework of understanding, a human can. The computer cannot reach outside the boundaries of the 9 dots, which form a square, a human can.
Last edited by Eodnhoj7 on Tue Feb 16, 2021 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Skip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skip »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 6:11 pm 1. Yet which causal links observed are chosen from a series of causal links.
Whichever ones are relevant to the situation at hand. Most minds are incapable of sorting through infinity every time their pants catch fire.
2. "Empty in themselves" not empty.
Oh, well, that's entirely .... the same.
3. "Your pants are on fire" during "x" time in "y" position at "z" spot is a necessary progression.
Necessary? No. Just go sit in tub of water.
In the present moment, you have to deal with the present situation. If you stop to dwell on progressions, x and y co-ordinates and point forms, you die before you can replicate. Real world logic can't afford the wastage.
4. The logical formula is based upon the Munchauseen trilemma.
So? That doesn't make it comprehensive of logic.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skip wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 8:09 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 6:11 pm 1. Yet which causal links observed are chosen from a series of causal links.
Whichever ones are relevant to the situation at hand. Most minds are incapable of sorting through infinity every time their pants catch fire.
2. "Empty in themselves" not empty.
Oh, well, that's entirely .... the same.
3. "Your pants are on fire" during "x" time in "y" position at "z" spot is a necessary progression.
Necessary? No. Just go sit in tub of water.
In the present moment, you have to deal with the present situation. If you stop to dwell on progressions, x and y co-ordinates and point forms, you die before you can replicate. Real world logic can't afford the wastage.
4. The logical formula is based upon the Munchauseen trilemma.
So? That doesn't make it comprehensive of logic.
1. The situation at hand is constantly changing thus resulting in a non finite (infinite) number of assertions which are constantly assumed.

2. No it is not the same. A phenomenon as empty in itself does not exist on it's own terms, it exists as connected to another phenomenon.

3. We dwell on the progressions as they take place as we assume them as they continually manifest. This continual manifestation of a phenomenon is the change of the phenomenon.

4. The point of view, regress (change) and circularity (repetition) are foundations for logic.
Skip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skip »

O - K... you've made the same assertion several times now.
....and?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skip wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 9:27 pm O - K... you've made the same assertion several times now.
....and?
And you the same...anyhow a context is needed under a set of rules logic falls under. If you disagree with these rules you are disagreeing with inescapable foundations logic exists through. The repeatability of these assertions follows the same repetitive nature embodied within logic. All repeats under a newer variation.
Skepdick
Posts: 14363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:27 pm A computer cannot leave its own framework of understanding, a human can.
Wouldn't you say that "leaving one's framework of understanding" is called learning?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning
Skepdick
Posts: 14363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:03 pm And you the same...anyhow a context is needed under a set of rules logic falls under.
From the rules of logic to the logic of rules

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:03 pm If you disagree with these rules you are disagreeing with inescapable foundations logic exists through.
Not even close. If I disagree with the "inescapable foundations" - I can just change the "inescapable foundations". On the fly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-modifying_code
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:16 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:27 pm A computer cannot leave its own framework of understanding, a human can.
Wouldn't you say that "leaving one's framework of understanding" is called learning?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning
"Machine learning algorithms are used in a wide variety of applications". The machine learning is grounded within an algorithm, the machine cannot choose or create this algorithm without being subject to a programmer beyond it.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:17 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:03 pm And you the same...anyhow a context is needed under a set of rules logic falls under.
From the rules of logic to the logic of rules

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:03 pm If you disagree with these rules you are disagreeing with inescapable foundations logic exists through.
Not even close. If I disagree with the "inescapable foundations" - I can just change the "inescapable foundations". On the fly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-modifying_code
The progression of one foundation to another is a foundation, thus the foundation repeats as a foundation. Its paradoxical. The nature of progressive assertions exists beyond what is programmable.
Skepdick
Posts: 14363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:34 pm The progression of one foundation to another is a foundation, thus the foundation repeats as a foundation. Its paradoxical. The nature of progressive assertions exists beyond what is programmable.
My Philosophy GPT3 bot says more profound things than you.
Skip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skip »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:03 pm And you the same...anyhow a context is needed under a set of rules logic falls under. If you disagree with these rules you are disagreeing with inescapable foundations logic exists through. The repeatability of these assertions follows the same repetitive nature embodied within logic. All repeats under a newer variation.
So, you can't see any difference between logic as exercised by reasoning entities and the formulaic representations of logical deduction.
Is there anything to discuss?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:35 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:34 pm The progression of one foundation to another is a foundation, thus the foundation repeats as a foundation. Its paradoxical. The nature of progressive assertions exists beyond what is programmable.
My Philosophy GPT3 bot says more profound things than you.
Then let it do the argument for you if it is so advanced. I see you are reverting to ad hominums now which only points to where your argument is lacking.

My stance is a simple paradox, truth does not need to be profound to be true.
Last edited by Eodnhoj7 on Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:31 am, edited 2 times in total.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skip wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:36 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:03 pm And you the same...anyhow a context is needed under a set of rules logic falls under. If you disagree with these rules you are disagreeing with inescapable foundations logic exists through. The repeatability of these assertions follows the same repetitive nature embodied within logic. All repeats under a newer variation.
So, you can't see any difference between logic as exercised by reasoning entities and the formulaic representations of logical deduction.
Is there anything to discuss?
The formulaic representation of logical deduction are formed through reasoning entitities and vice versa. They are both intertwined.
Skepdick
Posts: 14363
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Skip wrote: Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:36 pm So, you can't see any difference between logic as exercised by reasoning entities and the formulaic representations of logical deduction.
Is there anything to discuss?
Since deduction does not permit for any epistemic uncertainty, I can say with great level of certainty that nobody has ever logically deduced anything in this universe.

If your account of reasoning is "logical deduction" you are accounting wrong about your own thinking.
Post Reply