Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Religion, God, and Theology Discussion of God, religion, faith, theology, and spirituality.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-31-2018, 11:37 AM   #126
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 75,720
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel View Post
My comment to Aaron earlier in the thread was to try and point the way to what I think is a more useful line of enquiry for DoOrDoNot.
Ah, so this is your fault, eh? I might have known :P

Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel View Post
I think that Aaron and Orp are using definitions of categories in a "moving goalposts" type of way.
I don't think so. I can see how we would all be using definitions which you disagree with given your view, but they are the most common definitions, and I think they've been consistent about their usage.

One of the points I was trying to make with DODN is that his own logical argument in the OP is essentially equivocating about definitions, given his later expansion. That is, the logical argument is written in a way that invites the reader to use the typical definitions, otherwise there's no point in distinguishing the self-awareness of humans and that of the universe. But using those definitions, step 3 is a fallacy. He then rejects that it's a fallacy by appealing to the idea that there are no distinctions (logical or otherwise) between humans and the universe, so that step 3 is not a fallacy. But in that case, the argument becomes circular because under such a definition the first step is already the conclusion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel View Post
I dont know if I would argue that. I think I would claim that there is only the universe, and that its human perception and thought that divides it up into separate objects. Perhaps thats saying the same thing though.
I think that's different from what OrP said, but maybe I misunderstood. The above is what I thought you would claim, and what seems like DODN's approach now, at least to me.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 12:00 PM   #127
spanktehbadwookie
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
spanktehbadwookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: River Region
Posts: 18,759
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

The self awareness of the whole universe is local. Thatís us. Local beings so far as our senses can determine. Local enough to qualify.

Why virtualize that self awareness is non local?

Is the whole universe including non locality?

Is language more flexible than it can take rigid form?
spanktehbadwookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 12:11 PM   #128
neeeel
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,651
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
Ah, so this is your fault, eh? I might have known :P


well, no, because he has totally ignored it :P
neeeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 01:41 PM   #129
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 75,720
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel View Post
well, no, because he has totally ignored it :P
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 02:06 PM   #130
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,345
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel View Post
well, no, because he has totally ignored it :P
Not "totally" ignored:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
Good question. I'd say that there's no specific point, much like the heap fallacy. But the further along the chain of proximal possession you are, the less likely it is to "have" something and the more likely that it is to "contain" it. I'll also note that "contain" seems to implicate an "interior" of some sort, which may be adding to the structural use of the word.

If we were living in the interior of the earth, we would be more apt to say that the earth "contains" dogs rather than the earth "has" dogs.
I do acknowledge the limitations of language in this way, that our words do not always capture the intended information. Fortunately, I've been able to mostly avoid this by providing specific examples, such as the {1, 2, 3} and {1, 2} analogy and the "less than 7 feet [or 10 feet] in length" property.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 02:13 PM   #131
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,345
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
One of the points I was trying to make with DODN is that his own logical argument in the OP is essentially equivocating about definitions, given his later expansion. That is, the logical argument is written in a way that invites the reader to use the typical definitions, otherwise there's no point in distinguishing the self-awareness of humans and that of the universe. But using those definitions, step 3 is a fallacy. He then rejects that it's a fallacy by appealing to the idea that there are no distinctions (logical or otherwise) between humans and the universe, so that step 3 is not a fallacy. But in that case, the argument becomes circular because under such a definition the first step is already the conclusion.
This type of definitional problem arises also with the concept of an "individual" state in the universe. I tried to poke at that one earlier, but decided it was probably too technical to make meaningful progress.

If the universe consists of "all states" and those states are distinguishable in some way (so that we can identify an "individual" state), then the universe is distinguishable into discrete "informational" units, which contradicts that portions of the universe cannot be distinguished from other portions of it.

The most consistent framing is that the universe merely consists of one state. The universe simply is, and there is no way to distinguish any part of it from any other part of it, because it's all the same informational block. But that's not the logic that D0DN is relying upon to make his argument.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 02:49 PM   #132
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Position View Post
So?



Sure, properties of parts can tell you something about properties of the whole. Your mistake, as I've been saying all along is the specific inference you are making, that the whole has all the same properties as its individual parts.
I certainly have not said that and denied it multiple times...unless that whole is everything there is

Quote:
You can make the inference that parts of the universe is self-aware by using the syllogism that humans are self-aware and humans are part of the universe.
You cannot distinguish parts of the universe from itself. The universe is all that is, there is no space to move that part into, conceptually or otherwise. The universe is its parts.

Even imagining it is impossible. For if you attempt to imagine a universe not consisting of mind you undercut your own existence.


Quote:
But it requires additional work to also conclude that the whole has a property of a part. This is because part of A is not identical to A. You want to reject the inference (I assume) that part of A necessarily has all the same properties as A.
It requires way less work when the whole is also everything there is. When that happens, the part of A really is identical to A.

Quote:
Anyway, I'm just repeating myself here, so I'm not sure there's much point to continuing this conversation.
You are repeating the same assumption mistake since your first post. I dont think you've quite comprehended it yet tbh.

Last edited by Do0rDoNot; 12-31-2018 at 02:54 PM.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 02:52 PM   #133
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
It seems to me that you are insisting on reading my post using a very broad definition of logic, whereas I was talking specifically about the kind of syllogistic, deductive logic employed in the argument in the first post of this thread.

One of the reasons I used "water is H20" (and logical induction) as an example of what I meant by the limitations of deductive logic was to try to make the scope of my comments clearer.
You guys are fighting hard. Its admirable in a stubborn sort of way.

The basic laws of logic are what I'm referring to. They're required to think.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 03:09 PM   #134
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
This type of definitional problem arises also with the concept of an "individual" state in the universe. I tried to poke at that one earlier, but decided it was probably too technical to make meaningful progress.

If the universe consists of "all states" and those states are distinguishable in some way (so that we can identify an "individual" state), then the universe is distinguishable into discrete "informational" units, which contradicts that portions of the universe cannot be distinguished from other portions of it.



The most consistent framing is that the universe merely consists of one state. The universe simply is, and there is no way to distinguish any part of it from any other part of it, because it's all the same informational block. But that's not the logic that D0DN is relying upon to make his argument.
This is literally nonsensical. You're making the universe out to be all states and an individual state at the same time. The universe isnt an individual state. It cannot be of course, because we can see past states of the universe when we look through a telescope which proves it contains multiple states of itself at once. It is no less the universe at singularity + x than you were less you when you were a baby.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 03:25 PM   #135
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 75,720
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot View Post
You guys are fighting hard. Its admirable in a stubborn sort of way.
After making a snarky comment I felt like it was just a courtesy to also provide some substantive feedback. But if you prefer snark only I can accommodate that.

I do sort of agree with OrP that it seems like this is a conversational dead end though, so let me ask you something else: assuming for a moment that your argument succeeds, where are you going with this anyway? What prompted these thoughts, what conclusions are you drawing?
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 03:36 PM   #136
neeeel
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,651
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
Not "totally" ignored:
No, I meant DoDN ignored it as an idea of a different way to go about this, I did see your reply
neeeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 08:59 PM   #137
VeeDDzz`
Pooh-Bah
 
VeeDDzz`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,333
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
I do sort of agree with OrP that it seems like this is a conversational dead end though, so let me ask you something else: assuming for a moment that your argument succeeds, where are you going with this anyway? What prompted these thoughts, what conclusions are you drawing?
I've been trying to get a good answer to this from the beginning. Its clear that his thoughts are not.

Seeing this, I find it more informative to find out about the motivation.

So far, the motivation/implications provided haven't been interesting enough to consider the argument more clearly.

I also don't think the logical approach works well with this kind of philosophy; better communicated through metaphor.

Last edited by VeeDDzz`; 12-31-2018 at 09:06 PM.
VeeDDzz` is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 09:26 PM   #138
spanktehbadwookie
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
spanktehbadwookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: River Region
Posts: 18,759
Properties of humans are properties of the universe

I think the problem is the fallacy described is one of idolization. Idolize the nose of the universe despite itís face. I donít recall detecting that. What does supposing a rock is self aware by virtue of the universe matter, if that doesnít change that it is a rock?

Hey what are the odds ancient healers gave people suffering from anxiety stims and the stims they had available were rocks? Whether or not the rock is self aware, we are self aware and have a relationship with rock with a continuity across time. A very individual- based relationship. Geologist, rock collector, rock whisperer. Whatever.

We have a creative relationship with rocks. Itís satisfying to contemplate I dare say. But itís not the making of a rock idol.

Though one has to have wonder of ancient gratitude spontaneously for rock cave shelter during a terrifying storm that an imagined ancestor probably faced. We can establish a real tight human/rock relationship. An integral relationship. Rocks must be capable of relationships with self awareness because that is what we have. Rocks may be the part of the universe to be aware of for another part of the universe to have awareness of.

Rocks donít must need self awareness. Rocks must only exist ( be rocks) capable of being perceived by the sort of awareness that is also aware of self. There is no need to idolize rocks either. Just enjoying the relationship seems well enough.
Ancient cave art and skipping rocks on the pond are the universe.
spanktehbadwookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 09:32 PM   #139
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,345
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot View Post
This is literally nonsensical.
I would expect nothing less of it. It is, after all, the only consistent framework that one can use with the parameters you've established.

Quote:
It cannot be of course, because we can see past states of the universe when we look through a telescope which proves it contains multiple states of itself at once.
Look at you with your universal reference frame! How cute!
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 10:13 PM   #140
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
I would expect nothing less of it. It is, after all, the only consistent framework that one can use with the parameters you've established.
You're probably setting new records for how many different ways someone can say: "I dont understand so it must be wrong!"
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 12:51 AM   #141
VeeDDzz`
Pooh-Bah
 
VeeDDzz`'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,333
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Not understanding what is presented is almost never the fault of the audience.

Usually... poorly understood sentiments and poorly or lazily communicated philosophies result in misunderstanding.
VeeDDzz` is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2019, 01:07 AM   #142
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,345
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot View Post
You're probably setting new records for how many different ways someone can say: "I dont understand so it must be wrong!"
I'm not bothered by that. I've been fairly explicit and detailed in my criticisms. Your inability to meaningfully address them tells me everything I need to know about your position.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2019, 02:42 PM   #143
MacOneDouble
grinder
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 533
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot View Post
No. A chair leg can be distinct from and/or part of a chair. It can be removed from a chair and remain a chair leg.


The universe is a very different type of object. It's both all that exists and the basis of all existence. Objects within the universe cannot be distinct from it. Not ever. No matter how you look at it. Take away a part and it's no longer the universe, and the thing cant exist without its universe. To attempt to distinguish the universe from its parts is to pull both apart, definitionally, into non-meaning.
With my chair analogue argument attempt, I seemed to have shown Aaron's logic to be sound. It was also an attempt to see if a premise is wrong. Obviously a chair can be made of different materials. Rationally, the universe is made of different compounds, which possess different properties, but are part of the universe. Singular.

How about instead attempting to form an argument about how objects are not really inseparable at all - the mistake being made here? You may come to the exact same conclusion.
Quote:
The universe is a very different type of object.

Last edited by MacOneDouble; 01-03-2019 at 02:50 PM.
MacOneDouble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 01:26 AM   #144
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacOneDouble View Post
With my chair analogue argument attempt, I seemed to have shown Aaron's logic to be sound. It was also an attempt to see if a premise is wrong. Obviously a chair can be made of different materials. Rationally, the universe is made of different compounds, which possess different properties, but are part of the universe. Singular.
Sigh. One can imagine a chair without a leg because it's not necessarily true that a chair has legs. For example, a rocking chair doesn't have legs and is still a chair.

One cannot imagine a universe without mind. If you don't believe me, go ahead and try. Except, you can't use your mind to do it. That would be begging the question.

The universe and minds (self-awareness) are not removable from each other. Take out mind, and you don't have a universe. Take out the universe, and you don't have mind. It is necessarily true that the universe is self-aware, because we are the universe and we are self-aware. This proposition cannot be attacked because 1. you need a mind to attack it and 2. attempting to attack it is to concurrently attack the basis of your own existence.

So no, any 'logic' stated in the thread opposing this isn't remotely sound. It's either an honest misunderstanding, or it's willful ignorance. In Aaron's case it amazingly seems to be both.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 11:07 AM   #145
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 75,720
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

"imagining a universe without minds" and "imagining a universe without using your mind" are two very different things. The first is easy, cosmologists do it all the time. The second is impossible, as you say.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 11:40 AM   #146
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
"imagining a universe without minds" and "imagining a universe without using your mind" are two very different things. The first is easy, cosmologists do it all the time. The second is impossible, as you say.
They are equivalent. Minds are things, in the universe, used to imagine. A universe without mind cannot be imagined, because your mind is part of the universe (without which the universe wouldn't be the universe!) and you assume as much before you even start imagining. Thus the universe cannot be separated from your mind, and the dual nature of truth is that the mind cant be separated from the universe. The universe would cease to be the universe without your mind (or more generally, mind).

Now you can pretend to do it, but it requires you to reason using the very assumption you're intending to disprove. It might be 'possible' in that sense, but its ultimately false.

It's similar to trying to argue that reasoning can be done without logic or language. You're free to try, of course, but in order to do so you necessarily must use both logic and language, and so you clip your own wings before you're done your takeoff roll.

One of the reasons paradoxes in understanding arise at the base level of physics is precisely because cosmologists both include and disinclude mind at the same time.

Last edited by Do0rDoNot; 01-04-2019 at 12:09 PM.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 12:05 PM   #147
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 75,720
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

They are clearly not equivalent. In the first sentence "without minds" modifies the noun "universe". In the second it modifies the verb "imagine". The two sentences mean different things, and you're just equivocating between them. I can't really think of a plainer demonstration, maybe OrP can. Or perhaps you deny that we can imagine counterfactuals?

By the way, have you been reading the Upanishads or something? This sounds like a half-baked version of some of my favorites.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 12:21 PM   #148
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
They are clearly not equivalent. In the first sentence "without minds" modifies the noun "universe". In the second it modifies the verb "imagine". The two sentences mean different things, and you're just equivocating between them. I can't really think of a plainer demonstration, maybe OrP can. Or perhaps you deny that we can imagine counterfactuals?

By the way, have you been reading the Upanishads or something? This sounds like a half-baked version of some of my favorites.
To attempt to imagine a universe without mind requires both a universe with minds and a mind. So imagining a universe without a mind (or more generally, mind) is just as impossible as imagining anything without using a mind. They are linguistically equivalent statements.

Cosmologists have not been doing it all the time. They have been assuming (without stating it or even knowing it in most cases) the universe and mind are inseparable since they started being cosmologists. It's impossible to do anything but assume it.

And no to the Upanishads. Never read them.

Last edited by Do0rDoNot; 01-04-2019 at 12:30 PM.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 12:24 PM   #149
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 75,720
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

You seem to be missing the point that the imagined universe is not the actual universe. You're basically arguing that we're incapable of imagining things which don't exist, which is false. (And you're still equivocating but we've covered that).
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 12:46 PM   #150
Do0rDoNot
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: Properties of humans are properties of the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
You seem to be missing the point that the imagined universe is not the actual universe.
Imaginary universes are real; they are part of the universe. They are equivalent insofar that they both require mind. Any universe imagined without a mind cannot exist without a mind.

Quote:
You're basically arguing that we're incapable of imagining things which don't exist, which is false.
Imagined things do exist, of course.

Quote:
(And you're still equivocating but we've covered that).
Imagine:Mind::Imagining Universes:Universes with mind(s)

1)Imagining is a function of the mind
2)Imagining a universe is the function of only a universe with minds
3)Imagining is a function of the universe

Last edited by Do0rDoNot; 01-04-2019 at 12:53 PM.
Do0rDoNot is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online