Well yeah good luck with that. Very often when people run out of things to say they speak of love, but they do so vacuously, with love meaning only some vague kind of compassion, with no specific way to implement in practical situations. So it's just like getting each other drunk on cheap wine. — Agustino
Ok I know about this too. I know that stock trading is getting handed over to the computers with more and more complex models at predicting market moves. James Simmons, the billionaire and mathematician who runs a hedge fund operates according to such principles and has been very successful himself. But again I don't care about systems logic answering this kind of question. These are questions which have numerical answers, and depend on numbers alone. That is indeed doable. I'm interested about a different kind of question as I said before.Coca Cola is a money making machine and not a product. Already computers have taken over perhaps 30% of the business of Wall Street because they are faster and becoming more complex than even people. Humans are just much too slow for too many of these tasks and systems logic can be self-assembling where you just have to apply the fundamentals and watch what it does. — wuliheron
So yes okay, Coca-Cola is a money making machine. Suppose my intention is to make another money-making machine competing with Coca-Cola in the production and commercialization of canned coke. How does systems logic practically help me in solving such a problem? This problem cannot be answered by vague words, nor by numbers. So how does systems logic actually help? — Agustino
Okay so it seems to be that you propose that a straight answer cannot be given because we simply don't know it and we must advance towards an answer, and we will get it by doing. Just like in chess you cannot say in the beginning how exactly you will overcome an opponent. I agree with that, pretty much. But certainly a first move has to be made right? How does systems logic help us choose that first move, that every journey must begin with?Henry Ford was the first to develop the assembly line and, today, the major industries and governments are all investing countless billions in self-assembling technology. Reel to reel printing and other types of self-assembly including computers and a new self-assembling quantum computer even. Its analog logic which rules reality as we know it and, while we've master digital logic which is easier for error correction, the analog is about to show us the foundations of mathematics. Self-assembly is pattern matching which means its like assembling a giant jig saw puzzle where your have no real choice but to learn as you go and merely by assembling the puzzle new and greater truths are revealed about how to assemble it even better. — wuliheron
But certainly a first move has to be made right? How does systems logic help us choose that first move, that every journey must begin with? — Agustino
Okay but that's not an answer to the question is it? You haven't explained how it actually happens that a non-numerical answer of this kind could be provided by numerical means.There are people around the world assembling all the pieces as fast as they can with scientists having long ago divided themselves into four groups that are each searching for specific fractal recursions in nature. Commercial companies as well have joined in the action with Microsoft announcing they are now building a topological quantum computer. If my own theory is right, they will require four distinctive topological computers in order to predict roughly half of just about anything humanly imaginable. — wuliheron
Okay but that's not an answer to the question is it? You haven't explained how it actually happens that a non-numerical answer of this kind could be provided by numerical means. — Agustino
But that's not really what you mean. You don't really mean that every word has no intrinsic meaning or value. All that you mean is that the intrinsic meaning or value of the word is given always from the outside (in other words is transcendent) - from the context in which it is employed. The whole (or God) gives shape and being to the part.can describe life, the universe, and everything as a systems logic by merely treating every word as a variable with no intrinsic meaning or value — wuliheron
I take it from this that you believe that everything is, at its foundations, mathematics. Is this true? And if it is, why do you think this is so?They're about four times as complex as those of classical mathematics. It means logic and jokes, beauty and humor, are two ends of the same spectrum explaining why mathematicians are suddenly showing intense interest in humor and have already created the first quantifiable theory of humor. — wuliheron
But that's not really what you mean. You don't really mean that every word has no intrinsic meaning or value. All that you mean is that the intrinsic meaning or value of the word is given always from the outside (in other words is transcendent) - from the context in which it is employed. The whole (or God) gives shape and being to the part.
I take it from this that you believe that everything is, at its foundations, mathematics. Is this true? And if it is, why do you think this is so? — Agustino
Yes correct, what we perceive as funny is what is unlikely and unexpected and thus low in entropy. But you're going from an example of something being converted to mathematical language - humor, to saying that everything will be or can be so converted. And I'm asking how do you know that this is the case? — Agustino
Sure but you're not answering in any clear terms. That to me is the equivalent of this being a faith based commitment. You hope reality will turn out to be completely amenable to mathematical description. I'm not so sure. — Agustino
And you reckon the Chinese Daoist masters would consider such gatherings as part of the Daoist practice? I feel they were more interested in statecraft and the art of governance - similar to Sun Tzu. — Agustino
If one supposes the possibility of "teaching without words", then that would seem to point to a "learning without words". Can one listen to Silence? (Capitalized for contrast to the usual meaning, ie. the absence of sound). Can one learn from Silence, and if so what can be learned? Is Silence completely empty? Or is it simply out of the range of the range of hearing (or perhaps comprehension) in some way? Teachings such as the Tao te Ching use words, of course. It is in harmony with silence though, and makes the important disclaimer that it is merely a pale reflection of that which cannot be spoken. The author, one could say, seems to have listened to and been transformed by this Silence and encourages us to do likewise. — 0 thru 9
How is any of this philosophy? — Hanover
When starting the thread, it was a coin toss whether to put it in General Philosophy or Philosophy of Religion, if that is what you are referring to. The moderators could move it to the appropriate sub-forum if necessary. — 0 thru 9
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.