Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.atheism,alt.pagan,alt.consciousness,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!comp.vuw.ac.nz!canterbury.ac.nz!otago.ac.nz!n094061.es.co.nz!safir
From: safir@dunedin.es.co.nz (Craig Collings)
Subject: Re: Was: The end of god. Is now: God's back again!
Message-ID: <safir.49.00111681@dunedin.es.co.nz>
Lines: 71
Sender: usenet@news.otago.ac.nz (News stuff)
Nntp-Posting-Host: n094061.es.co.nz
Organization: Efficient Software New Zealand Ltd Internet Service
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]
References: <383kau$5q2@scapa.cs.ualberta.ca> <Cxzo7E.91v@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <Harmon.776.000A2404@psyvax.psy.utexas.edu> <1994Oct28.051800.20478@news.media.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 01:05:09 GMT

In article <1994Oct28.051800.20478@news.media.mit.edu> minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:
>From: minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky)
>Subject: Was: The end of god. Is now: God's back again!
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 05:18:00 GMT

>In article <Harmon.776.000A2404@psyvax.psy.utexas.edu>
>Harmon@psyvax.psy.utexas.edu (Michael G. Harmon) writes:
>>In article <Cxzo7E.91v@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca
>(Andrzej Pindor) writes:

         <and I haven't deleted a single snippet>
>>
>>>Your example just illustrates the Goedel theorem.  The point I was trying to 
>>>make was that to know something 'for sure' we also use mathematics, even
>>>if applied to a system external to the one in which this something is true.
>>>Short of divine inspiration, what we hold to be true in science is arrived at
>>>by logical reasoning at some level. We may propose various conjectures and
>>>even have a deep, unfaltering belief that such a conjecture is true, it only
>>>becomes a scientific truth if proven using logic. Penrose seems to suggest
>>>that there are some scientific (mathematical) truths which logic cannot prove.
>>>I have yet to hear an example. Yours does not cut it.
>>
>>>Andrzej
>>
>>It may be that Penrose is saying there are some truths that are not 
>>scientific in nature that will subsequently remain unprovable by scientific 
>>method.  It might be that such phenomenon that would be agreed upon as valid 
>>solely by the concurrance of a sufficient number of credentialed members of 
>>the scientific community who either try the idea out in their own minds and 
>>admit a certain reasonance with respect to the rest of what they know or 
>>perhaps be able to gain a statisical basis by experimenting with the 
>>subjective perceptions of a group of subjects who claim to be able to directly 
>>percieve aspects of the 'truth' in question.  


>I finally see what you mean.  You mean, like when almost everyone
>agrees that that thunder noise is when the rain god is angry, or that
>living things are animated by a vital force, and so forth?  And then
>burn the witches and wizards who don't join into that resonance.

>Jeez, did you really say "credentialed"?  Just like those "certified
>authentic professional psychics on TV?.  And for only $3.99 per
>minute?

>Still, I'll grant that anyone who posts to all of "comp.ai.philosophy,
>talk.philosophy.misc, talk.religion.newage, alt.atheism,
>alt.pagan,alt.consciousness, alt.paranormal.channeling, and
>alt.consciousness.mysticism" is probably suitably certifiable.
>Anyway, much as I disagree with Penrose, I don't think that this is
>"what Penrose is saying". But then I'm not completely unsure, however,
>that your second sentence is not entirely unmeaningless. My parser
>came unstacked around 'they know or perhaps be able to gain'. 

>Nice meter, though.

>    ___________________________________________
>  "Don't pay any attention to the critics. Don't even ignore them."
>                                            ---------  Sam Goldwyn



If someone could prove "zero" (aka 0, sifr et al.) I would be very interested. 
I had assumed it was a fiction of convenience.

:-)


                                                   |\/\/|
Craig.                                             |/\/\|
FX+64-03-477-5131                                  |\/\/|
a funny thing happened on the way to Dimashq...    |/\/\|
