Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 23-04-2008

Either I’m stuck in a time loop, or I’m still sick with the ‘flu from hell. It’s worth it just for the feverish hallucinations.

Thanks Greg.

Quote of the Day:

We all have our time machines. Some take us back, they’re called memories. Some take us forward, they’re called dreams.

Jeremy Irons, British actor

  1. Simulated reality: disingenuous logic?
    The simulation idea’s been kicking around the news quite a bit in the past few months.

    It’s often irritated me that I’ve never seen anybody refer ro Ramsey Dukes'”Words Made Flesh” from the eighties, a whole book on this idea (which I’d certainly recommend).

    My main point is this: Dukes (for those who don’t know him) is a bit of a trickster, and his baseline stated aim is the pursuit of mental states which allow more fun. He explicitly states that his training in maths and logic allows him to pull off a bit of slight of hand on the reader, and his idea (‘Johnston’s paradox’) is not presented as a proof.

    I’ve never seen this caveat added anywhere else, though to be honest I can’t say whether there’s more than a superficial similarity between Dukes’ ideas and those of Bostrom. I had had a glance at Bostrom’s paper and bolted when I saw too many mathematical symbols for my tiny mind.

    Thanks,

    Matt.

    1. And the trick is…
      Any system of logic is based on at least one unprovable axiom or premise. It is only by accepting such axioms ‘as if’ they are true, that the system of logic which derives from them gains its sense of internally-consistent reality or ‘truth’. This is the basis of our ordinary world of perception, as much as it is the basis of ‘magic’.

        1. You’re welcome
          The ideas of Ramsay Dukes have provided me with a framework through which I have been able to come to terms with a personal experience of profoundly weird serial synchronicity, which I’ll get around to publishing, in some form, hopefully fairly soon.

      1. Axiom
        Interestingly, the philosopher, Russell, tried to prove mathematics is true, but had to concede it all relies on axiom. The syllogism, at the heart of logic, always begins with an axiom.
        What is the difference, I’d like to know, between an axiom and a belief?

        Wise people usually begin as stupid ones

        Anthony North

        1. Beyond belief
          Pretty much the same, I’d say.

          I see different worldviews/belief systems as tools, each useful for a different job, depending on my current needs – no more mutually incompatible than a hammer and a spanner are.

          ————-

          I don’t believe in belief!

          Perceval

          1. ladies, gentlemen
            We can’t get anywhere with this. And it is undue criticism of logic.

            After all, the only thing I know is that I exist, in some way. The pesky rest of you could just be figments of my imagination. We all know that.

            Having said that, there is no reason to discard logic itself.

            Suppose you start with some assumptions, axioms if you want to call it that. Then you logically explore the consequences, and you find internal contradictions. At this point, you know there is a mistake somewhere. Maybe in the original assumption, or in the logic. Perhaps both.

            On the other hand if the same procedure does not find any internal contradictions, it is at least possible that the assumptions are true.

            But I don’t think the criticism, that there is an unprovable axiom, demontrates that the entire system is false. Unprovable yes. But you can’t prove that it is false either.

            —-
            if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)

          2. Axiom
            Hi Earthling,
            I’m certainly not saying we should abandon logic, or not use the axiom. I’m only talking about the validity of the knowledge that comes from it. It is often used as if it is some undisputable truth. It is not so.

            I’m fanatical about moderation

            Anthony North

          3. logic/truth/provability
            [quote]I don’t think the criticism, that there is an unprovable axiom, demontrates that the entire system is false. Unprovable yes. But you can’t prove that it is false either.[/quote]

            Sure. Logical statements derived from unproveable axioms are only true/false within that context. if x -> then y.

            ——

            I don’t believe in belief!

            Perceval

          4. 100 %
            My beef is not with people who realize that mathematics, languages and such systems are inherently incomplete.

            I just don’t accept the argument that goes like this:

            “Mathematics has been shown to be incomplete, using mathematics, Therefore my own favourite unprovable system must be superior.”

            Yet many people make that argument. I just say that these people are sillier than the mathematicians. At least the mathematicians are honest.

            They don’t claim to know 100% of the truth.

            Look for “Goedel” or “Halting Problem”, there are many descriptions of incompleteness.

            —-
            if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)

          5. I read Hofstadter’s classic
            I read Hofstadter’s classic Gödel, Escher, Bach (Amazon US and UK) back in the day – I’ve never been the same since (or maybe it was the mushrooms!).

            ——

            I don’t believe in belief!

            Perceval

          6. full disclosure
            I read that book too, when I was in grad school, studying some of the theoretical computer science. At the time, I actually understood all the discrete math that forms the basis.

            And I was sober. Well, a few beers. But i didnt smoke anything.

            It is a really good book.

            —-
            if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)

          7. Figment of imagination
            Hi Earthling

            You forgot to consider that what you think you are may be a figment of your imagination and that what we think others are may be a figment of our imagination, and that imagination is not what we think either.

            Logic is the tool that materializes imagination to a degree.

            The problem with truth is its relativity.

          8. right
            Yes of course, I just have this internal debate, with that Richard character.

            This is why movies are so disappointing when you read the book.

            What is your mental image of earthling? What do I look like? What color hair, how long is my nose? What color are my eyes? Am I left handed or right handed?

            As boring as I am, many people who read my comments have a mental image of me. People who debate with me here every day would probably never recognize me in the street.

            The problem with truth is that we don’t know.

            —-
            if everything is under control, you are not going fast enough (Mario Andretti)

          9. Truth
            [quote=earthling]
            The problem with truth is that we don’t know.
            [/quote]

            Exactly what you said. Knowing that is already a lot.
            Truth is directly related to believing at one level or another. Knowing is not.

        2. axiom
          Supposedly, an axiom is self-evident?…

          —–
          It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
          It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

          Red Pill Junkie

          1. So is …
            Hi Red,
            So is God to a Christian. And the same can be said for any culture, any time.

            I think, Perceval, your new tag-line is just a belief 🙂

            Reality, like time, is relative to the observer

            Anthony North

          2. Ok ok…
            I mean, self-evident to anyone through the use of logic. Like the axiom “all triangles have 3 sides” or something.

            —–
            It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
            It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

            Red Pill Junkie

          3. Triangle
            Hi Red,
            How many sides did a triangle have before Euclid thought of it? 🙂

            The balanced adult retains an inner child

            Anthony North

          4. Amend
            Delete ‘Euclid’, insert ‘ancient Egyptians’. Damned big triangles on them pyramids 🙂

            Tony is a D***head!

          5. Believe it or not…
            [quote=anthonynorth]I think, Perceval, your new tag-line is just a belief :-)[/quote]

            Exactly! (but it’s not one I adhere to)

            ——

            I don’t believe in belief!

            Perceval

          6. Too subtle?
            It’s a self-referential paradox – exposing the nature of belief itself

            ——

            I don’t believe in belief!

            Perceval

          7. Godel and skepticism
            AFAIK, Godel showed that there are limits to what logic and axioms can prove, even for things we know are true. Of course this doesn’t dispel the undoubted power and usefulness of logic, but it does argue against idolising it. We’ve all read examples here of personal experience being sacrificed on its altar by those at the extreme end of the skeptic spectrum

            Matt

          8. Tag-lines
            A lot of my tag-ines are purposely contradictory, showing that absolute knowledge cannot happen.

            I’m fanatical about moderation (for instance)

            Anthony North

  2. Ecuador
    Those plans won’t last long if Ecuador enters a war with Colombia, as their diplomatic relations have become more and more difficult since colombian forces bombarded a FARC camp that was located in ecuadorian territory. You see, the colombians claimed they are entitled to use the same strategies as the americans on their own war against terrorism, but that caused a great turmoil in all Latin America. There were several mexican students in that camp also, so the problem has implicated many countries, including of course Venezuela, since Colombia claims there areties between Hugo Chávez and the FARC groups.

    I want to visit Ecuador one of these days, my brother-in-law is ecuadorian BTW. I would love to visit Galápagos Island, but you need a special permit for that.

    —–
    It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
    It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

    Red Pill Junkie

  3. Monsters beneath our feet: LOL
    The tricks of the mind! For a minute I thought it read “subterranean creatures of myth, legend and POOP culture.”

    Maybe I was thinking of the urban myths of alligators living in NY sewers 😉

    —–
    It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
    It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

    Red Pill Junkie

  4. Altering Brain Chemistry At Will
    It shouldn’t be surprising that we not only can but do alter our brain chemistry at will. We do it constantly. If we didn’t we couldn’t change our behavior. Frinstance: any time we pay attention to something, and in doing so we find out that the thing was at least not a threat if not something beneficial, we get an increase in dopamine. This reinforces the association between our approach to that thing and our perception of it, making us consider it familiar and safe, or even something desirable. This is the “reward” system. People think that means it gives us a positive feel-good boost after food, sex, etc. This is not so. The word “reward” is used in the Skinnerian sense — positive reinforcement. It places a positive regard flag on the memory of what ever it was that produced the effect. Other neurotransmitters are responsible for the feel-good business, dopamine is simply responsible for making us learn something and change our future behavior towards it.

    As for altering at will, consider: depression is a state of low serotonin. Whether this is chronically low serotonin causing depression, or depression causing a lowered level of serotonin is irrelevant. Smiling can relieve depression. Decreased depression = increased serotonin. Again, which is cause and which is effect are irrelevant, as this happens in both cases. Bottom line, a purposeful behavior (smiling) can alter brain chemistry (serotonin levels) resulting in a behavioral change (decreased depression).

    No, I am not the brain specialist…..
    YES. Yes I AM the brain specialist.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal