{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4355", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 4355, "subject": "5HC : Utopias and tests", "messages": 5, "voices": 4, "first": "2005-02-03T11:14:50+00:00", "last": "2005-02-04T16:31:58+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<20050203191448.37372.qmail@web25702.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Jim Raylor", "address": "rjraylor at yahoo.co.uk" }, "date": "2005-02-03T11:14:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) 5HC : Utopias and tests", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Another person's Utopia is always worth a visit, but I\nwould not want to live in most of them.\n\nIn private conversation, Skinner referred to his own\ninternal processes as any of us do (I feel, I\nremember, I believe, I think etc) though if pushed he\ncould rephrase himself in more behaviouristic terms.\n\nTuring abstracted by considering simple devices with a\nfinite number of states, from this he came upon the\nbasis of universal computing devices and an\noperational definition of mathematical undecidability.\n\nI maintain 5HC is a logically and operationally\ndecidable proposition within the axiomatic structure\nof literature and art.\n\nA full simulation of all the conditioning agents is\nNOT required to reinforce the problem-solving\nbehaviour once the pattern is established.\n\n=====\nhttp://prisoner143.50megs.com/\n\nI am not a number I am a free person!\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\t\t" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Iorwerth Thomas", "address": "iorweththomas at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2005-02-04T06:11:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) 5HC : Utopias and tests", "in_reply_to": "<20050203191448.37372.qmail@web25702.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: Jim Raylor " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Turing abstracted by considering simple devices with a\nfinite number of states, from this he came upon the\nbasis of universal computing devices and an\noperational definition of mathematical undecidability.\n\nI maintain 5HC is a logically and operationally\ndecidable proposition within the axiomatic structure\nof literature and art." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ok, I'll bite. What's the axiomatic structure, and does it support:\n\na) Self-reference\nb) classical or non-classical logic ?\n\n(You might find that the system is Godel incomplete...)\n\nI'm not convinced that 5HoC is anything at all like a proposition. It's a \nlittle... big.\n\nIorwerth" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Maru Dubshinki", "address": "marudubshinki at gmail.com" }, "date": "2005-02-04T15:24:06+00:00", "subject": "(urth) 5HC : Utopias and tests", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You ever look at the encoded integers involved in the proofs of the\nvarious Godel proofs? Those are are propositions (If I am\nunderstanding 'propisition' as equivalent to theorems; if they are\naxioms, well it is still true, just in a different way), way bigger in\ninformation and bulk than 'Cerberus'\n\n~Maru\nMicrosoft delenda est.\nRemember what the dormouse said! Feed your head! Feed your head!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 14:10:29 +0000, Iorwerth Thomas\n wrote:\nI'm not convinced that 5HoC is anything at all like a proposition. It's a\nlittle... big.\n\nIorwerth\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris", "address": "rasputin_ at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2005-02-04T15:41:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) 5HC : Utopias and tests", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The information \"in\" 5HoC is not at all limited to the explicit data (the \nwords written on the page); the vast majority is implicated by the text. \nWhich is not to say that Godel's work is entirely explicit. But we are \ntalking about two very different ways of writing or using language - one is \ntailored to try and be as explicit and rigorous as possible, the other not \nso much.\n\nI suspect there is also an inherent problem with calling a work of fiction a \n'proposition'; I have some doubts that something can be both at the same \ntime, because even a false proposition is not exactly fictional.\n\nAlso, if 5HoC were intended as a proposition, it would be difficult to \nexplain why the relations between its elements are so hard to define. Unless \none means to suggest that it's just a really, really lousy proposition." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You ever look at the encoded integers involved in the proofs of the\nvarious Godel proofs? Those are are propositions (If I am\nunderstanding 'propisition' as equivalent to theorems; if they are\naxioms, well it is still true, just in a different way), way bigger in\ninformation and bulk than 'Cerberus'\n\n~Maru\nMicrosoft delenda est.\nRemember what the dormouse said! Feed your head! Feed your head!\n\nOn Fri, 04 Feb 2005 14:10:29 +0000, Iorwerth Thomas\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'm not convinced that 5HoC is anything at all like a proposition. It's \na\nlittle... big.\n\nIorwerth\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Maru Dubshinki", "address": "marudubshinki at gmail.com" }, "date": "2005-02-04T16:31:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) 5HC : Utopias and tests", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What you say is true: I was merely pointing out that size is no bar to\na proposition. They can be as big as are needful.\nI myself do not think Cerberus as a whole is a proposition; it is\nclearly, and truly segmented in three parts, both in topography,\ncomposition (style and historical) and in that they are\ntransfromations of one proposition if anything. But if Cerberus can be\nsaid to be a proposition, it is laid out nowhere in an unveiled form.\n\n~Maru\nRemember what the dormouse said! Feed your head! Feed your head!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:40:05 +0000, Chris wrote:\nThe information \"in\" 5HoC is not at all limited to the explicit data (the\nwords written on the page); the vast majority is implicated by the text.\nWhich is not to say that Godel's work is entirely explicit. But we are\ntalking about two very different ways of writing or using language - one is\ntailored to try and be as explicit and rigorous as possible, the other not\nso much.\n\nI suspect there is also an inherent problem with calling a work of fiction a\n'proposition'; I have some doubts that something can be both at the same\ntime, because even a false proposition is not exactly fictional.\n\nAlso, if 5HoC were intended as a proposition, it would be difficult to\nexplain why the relations between its elements are so hard to define. Unless\none means to suggest that it's just a really, really lousy proposition." } ] } ] }