Reality is Reduced to Axioms

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Spellbound, Aug 26, 2014.

  1. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,535
    Could you tell me what (you think) the point is in quoting from an article that you have ALREADY linked to?
    And why you gave the link a second time?
    And what help you think it gives in answering the questions I asked?
    And why you (appear to) assume that I didn't read it?

    BTW - from that quote - he's wrong: it's not quantifiable, since neither Langan nor he produce any numbers.

    The guy is a nut, like Langan,
    He engages in double talk, like Langan.
    He makes claims that he doesn't support, like Langan.

    In short that "paper" does NOT validate the CTMU.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    I had to produce a quote.

    It actually does have actual value.

    Nothing validates closed an comprehensive logic to you.

    You have been wrong as always. I have noted a propo Langan's best work and my best work in this thread.

    That is why you're still wrong. And continue to be (possibly while not innocent of it).
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,535
    Why?
    It doesn't advance your case.

    According to you.
    But not in reality.

    It's not comprehensive.
    It's tautological crap.

    Yet all you can do is claim this, not show it.

    Yeah, considering the grammatical/ syntactical/ spelling errors in that sentence, and your evident intellectual deficiencies I'm inclined to believe that what you've done is your "best work".
    Unfortunately it's not good enough.

    And back to unevidenced claims...
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    You are either ignorant or you are the one with the intellectual deficiency.

    Have a nice life.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    And after-life.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
  10. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    2. The currency of telic feedback is a quantifiable self-selection parameter, generalized utility, a generalized property of law and state in the maximization of which they undergo mutual refinement (note that generalized utility is self-descriptive or autologous, intrinsically and retroactively defined within the system, and “pre-informational” in the sense that assigns no specific property to any specific object). Through telic feedback, a system retroactively self-configures by reflexively applying a “generalized utility function” to its internal existential potential or possible futures. In effect, the system brings itself into existence as a means of atemporal communication between its past and future whereby law and state, syntax and informational content, generate and refine each other across time to maximize total systemic self-utility. This defines a situation in which the true temporal identity of the system is a distributed point of temporal equilibrium that is both between and inclusive of past and future. In this sense, the system is timeless or atemporal. (p.6-7)

    http://www.thejournalofunconsciouspsychology.com/web_documents/norman_on_langan_atemp._recur.pdf

    Retroactively self-configures.
     
  11. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,633
    I'm sure there have been. Unfortunately, I fail to see the connection.

    What do "spiritual experiences" have to do with the supposed existence of a perfect divine language?
     
  12. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    The "language of languages" is SCSPL. Without its grammar, telesis could not become bounded, and law and state could not become mutually refined. See my quotation just above. It sums it up. As well as this entire thread.
     
  13. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,633
    I don't have a clue what that means. Can somebody (that's you, Spellbound) translate it into comprehensible English?
     
  14. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    It cannot be explained in any simpler language. Langan's IQ is almost 200. That means he has better access to holistic thoughts than anyone else. Which means his wording is almost perfect. I apologize for that.
     
  15. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Read it with the intent of memorizing it and you shall not go astray!
     
  16. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,535
    The error here, on your part Yazata [sup]1[/sup], is thinking that Spellbound CAN translate it into comprehensible English.
    He no more understands it than he can see the error in simply repeating "It's right" as "evidence" that it's right.


    1 Actually I'm assuming that you're fully aware that SB is clueless, and that you're just trying to get him to realise that he can't make it comprehensible.
    I suspect that he's subscribing to the CTMU because it's incomprehensible to him. (On the grounds that "It's too complicated for me to understand therefore it must be right").
     
  17. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,633
    That might be true. It probably can't be explained any more clearly without its losing its peculiar and probably intentional quality of seeming to almost reveal something tremendously deep and profound, without ever clearly communicating precisely what it is.

    He says that it is.

    In other words, you're not sure what he's saying either, or why he says it, but nevertheless you still choose to believe in him as your chosen prophet. Right?

    Look Spellbound, philosophy isn't just a matter embracing suitably 'deep', 'cosmic' or 'spiritual' conclusions. Philosophy is more concerned with the quality of the reasoning upon which those conclusions are based. Philosophy is the intellectual process by which we travel from here to there, wherever 'there' ultimately turns out to be.

    In other words, if conclusions have to be accepted on faith, then what's happening isn't really philosophy.
     
  18. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    This is probably the most important quote that I want you to take away from the CTMU (for now).
     
  19. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,535
    How can it be important when it's (as previously noted) demonstrably wrong?
     
  20. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,633
    That's the same text that I asked you to explain in post #90. You said that it was already stated almost perfectly (since Langan is supposedly a superhuman intelligence) and can't be further explained in terms comprehensible to mortals.

    Which seems to imply that you can't understand it either. (You're pretty clearly human.)

    Nevertheless, you insist that it's "the most important quote that I want you to take away from the CTMU".

    The question is why?

    If Langan's ideas are supposed to be so advanced that they are incomprehensible to the rest of the human race, then what value or importance can they have for anyone but him?
     
  21. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Follow my path. Walk in my shoes. The shoes of making it comprehensible, which it in fact is. Which means your judgement about my failure to understand is hasty.
     
  22. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    You know, I could pretend that it is demonstrably wrong, but that would be abjectly wrong. As you are being and have consistently been about evidence not being presented and attempted by me. That is worse than any other wrong imaginable.
     
  23. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,535
    Oh good.
    That must mean that YOU have managed to find where, and how, "telic feedback" is quantified.
    And could you please explain to us, or just me, what units the quantity is in?
    And how these quantities are measured.

    The only "evidence" you have ever presented is to quote more of Langan's work (which is self-referential and therefore not evidence) or make unsupported assertions.
    All while carefully avoiding, or ignoring, the objections that have been raised (e.g. the fact that it takes an unsupported premise [god exists, the bible is true] as a start point to "prove" that god exists).
     

Share This Page