tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post3204972468732460955..comments2024-03-28T20:04:20.286-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: The Biology of Truth and the Physics of Intelligence (6.27.10)Gagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger122125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-65370620276856752722008-06-28T09:14:00.000-07:002008-06-28T09:14:00.000-07:00Ray, it goes double for the foolish things. Quite ...Ray, it goes double for the foolish things. Quite often the most foolish is the over intellectualized and inappropriate demand for 'proof'... see Hume (or the mirror)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-84456291508048480522008-06-28T08:39:00.000-07:002008-06-28T08:39:00.000-07:00Van -Fundamental thingsare often quite simple, sav...Van -<BR/><BR/>Fundamental things<BR/>are often quite simple, save<BR/>in consequences.Ray Ingleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16290483120987779339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-913662250449272472008-06-28T07:56:00.000-07:002008-06-28T07:56:00.000-07:00Well said Thomism. Ray, can't but noticing ... I w...Well said Thomism. <BR/><BR/>Ray, can't but noticing ... I wonder if you do... how ... immature your comments look in comparison? Really, I'm not trying to be insulting, but it just struck me... "But Dad! I'm ELEVEN YEARS OLD", for some reason immediatly came to mind.<BR/><BR/>Gagdad said "Obviously many highly intelligent people do not understand Aquinas, for other issues are involved, e.g., pride, cynicism, and adherence to various self-refuting intellectual fashions of the day."<BR/><BR/>Yes, and I'd direct attention to Hume especially as a prime sources of that frame of mind.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-19340223564186847042008-06-28T07:52:00.000-07:002008-06-28T07:52:00.000-07:00Beautifully put, Bob.One either sees it or not, th...Beautifully put, Bob.<BR/><BR/>One either sees it or not, then one either acts on it or not.NoMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100042056270224683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-19676489693540087632008-06-28T06:55:00.000-07:002008-06-28T06:55:00.000-07:00BTW, one reason I appreciate Schuon so much is tha...BTW, one reason I appreciate Schuon so much is that he provided a kind of key for me that suddenly opened the door to the depth of scholastic philosophy. When I said to anonymous that the modern man says that "Thomism is outdated" as opposed to "I am not intelligent enough to understand Thomism," that was not intended as a personal insult to him, but a general observation which I know to be true. And as always, I wasn't talking about profane "intelligence" but about the intellect. Obviously many highly intelligent people do not understand Aquinas, for other issues are involved, e.g., pride, cynicism, and adherence to various self-refuting intellectual fashions of the day.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-86406283139708835782008-06-28T06:43:00.000-07:002008-06-28T06:43:00.000-07:00Thomism:Very well put. I suppose my objection was...Thomism:<BR/><BR/>Very well put. I suppose my objection was to someone who wrenches the proofs out of their overall context and demands to be "shown God," so to speak. This is a form of bad will that acts as a sort of preemptive attack on the grace that will give body and substance to the proofs, since there is still an ontological leap between the proof and the pudding, or between the reason which "knows" and the intellect which "sees."<BR/>Not sure if that was clear, but I just woke up....Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-45102673316882243492008-06-28T06:34:00.000-07:002008-06-28T06:34:00.000-07:00Yep, there are (apparently) basic unchangable feat...Yep, there are (apparently) basic unchangable features in this particular universe. <BR/><BR/>Like the fact that e is appoximately 2.72. <BR/><BR/>I don't think that the value of e (in this universe, at least) has much of anything to do with valuing spiritual truth.<BR/><BR/>Now, if you want to talk about the importance of 0, that's a horse of a different color...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-60393875866974345172008-06-28T05:56:00.000-07:002008-06-28T05:56:00.000-07:00Mushroom - You've got it exactly! A chess player w...Mushroom - You've got it exactly! A chess player wants to win the game, and the interaction of that value, along with the basic nature of the moves available in chess, dictates strategies to follow.<BR/><BR/>Humans have things they value, too. And there are basic, unchangeable features of the world we live in. So there are strategies that inevitably arise from the interaction of those two items. Things that are 'wise', not 'permitted'...Ray Ingleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16290483120987779339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-59282263089763671322008-06-28T05:31:00.000-07:002008-06-28T05:31:00.000-07:00Anonymous, Yes, one of the "assumptions" of Aquina...Anonymous, <BR/><BR/>Yes, one of the "assumptions" of Aquinas's proof is that when you prove the existence of something, it is something and not nothing. If you think calling a cause "something" is a questionable assumption, you have some issues you need to resolve before attempting to understand this proof. <BR/><BR/>Bob, <BR/><BR/>Schuon does give proofs for God's existence, as at the beginning of Religio Perennis, which are identical to things Aquinas says in many places, like in the Second part of the Summa T, q. 2 article 8<BR/><BR/>"the object of the will is the universal good, just as the object of the intellect is the universal truth...which is not found in any creature, but in God alone... so God alone fulfills human desire."<BR/><BR/>"Universal" here is simply a synonym for "Absolute". In Aquinas's terms, the will seeks all that it seeks for the sake of union with the universal or Absolute, just as the intellect desires to know God in the search for every truth. After all, who can desire the limited or finite good as limited or finite? This would be like loving the weekend because of monday morning, or loving some truth because it failed to answer some other question. But if no one lives the the relative good as relative, it seems we are loving it for the sake of the absolute. Shuon and St. Thomas see eye to eye on this. <BR/><BR/>Shuon's point about the need to desire God before proving him is really a truth that applies to all learning, and not to the theistic proofs as such. You can't learn Latin, or come to see psychological problems without the desire to do so either.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-90367427038293141562008-06-28T04:09:00.000-07:002008-06-28T04:09:00.000-07:00Hi anon,What you are calling an assumption is in r...Hi anon,<BR/><BR/>What you are calling an assumption is in reality a first principle. As Bernard Lonergan suggests,the driving force behind the proofs of Aquinas is the assumption of the intelligibility of reality. We all count on it and we all see it to the degree that we are willing to follow where it leads. It is seen but it cannot be proved only lived and to live otherwise is to court insanity. It is self authenticating. When it is followed consistently and not dismissed because of the rejection of where it leads, this insight/intuition leads to God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-48468547228001042062008-06-27T22:22:00.000-07:002008-06-27T22:22:00.000-07:00When Kasparov lost to Deep Blue, he didn't lose to...When Kasparov lost to Deep Blue, he didn't lose to a computer...in essence he lost to an army of programmers and every GrandMaster to play the game.<BR/><BR/>The fact that Kasparov managed to get so many draws shows just how good he really is. <BR/><BR/>Of course, I still think Paul Morphy could've taken him. :^)USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-75268938731159655212008-06-27T21:19:00.000-07:002008-06-27T21:19:00.000-07:00I can’t let Fido play chess anymore. He bites off ...I can’t let Fido play chess anymore. He bites off all the heads and the computer has no sense of humor.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-80344849078443181532008-06-27T21:15:00.000-07:002008-06-27T21:15:00.000-07:00Thanks, Nomo. I’ll let Fido know when he wakes up....Thanks, Nomo. I’ll let Fido know when he wakes up.<BR/>Before hey hit the hay, he mumbled something about Ray probably routin’ for the computer in those chess matches..Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-54112980187811105172008-06-27T21:07:00.000-07:002008-06-27T21:07:00.000-07:00Settle down, you're in ther too, Scatter. But peac...Settle down, you're in ther too, <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=14&chapter=9&verse=21&version=49&context=verse" REL="nofollow">Scatter</A>. But peacocks? That's just not right.NoMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100042056270224683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-60914061271117642292008-06-27T21:01:00.000-07:002008-06-27T21:01:00.000-07:00No kidding!<A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=25&chapter=9&verse=4&version=49&context=verse" REL="nofollow">No kidding!</A>NoMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100042056270224683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-7685384424110613342008-06-27T20:59:00.001-07:002008-06-27T20:59:00.001-07:00You tell 'em, Fido!You tell 'em, <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=24&chapter=26&verse=11&version=49&context=verse" REL="nofollow">Fido</A>!NoMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100042056270224683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-7784262616020431552008-06-27T20:59:00.000-07:002008-06-27T20:59:00.000-07:00Fido!Stop teasing Ray.Down boy.Fido!<BR/>Stop teasing Ray.<BR/>Down boy.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-28678504468881398022008-06-27T20:52:00.000-07:002008-06-27T20:52:00.000-07:00Speaking of grinding bananas,I just asked Scatter ...Speaking of grinding bananas,<BR/><BR/>I just asked Scatter and he said:<BR/><BR/>“Even I know there’s more to chess than that. Those programs didn’t write themselves.”Fidohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02642704557546153909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-13844564797821707792008-06-27T20:51:00.000-07:002008-06-27T20:51:00.000-07:00Ray, a strategy is means to achieve an end. A valu...Ray, a strategy is means to achieve an end. A value is what makes the end meaningful. <BR/>***********************<BR/>Game over. <BR/><BR/>All your morals are belong to us.<BR/>***********************mushroomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07651027035577798096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-67652879600516012542008-06-27T18:59:00.000-07:002008-06-27T18:59:00.000-07:00USS Ben said:"Or, you can buy a bigger shovel (cre...USS Ben said:<BR/><BR/><I>"Or, you can buy a bigger shovel (created by zero) and be inclined to believe you are here because of zero as you dig more zeros."</I><BR/><BR/>now i can dig that<BR/>especially when zero<BR/>reveals an O tellrobinstarfishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15665546554663005609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-47021577782742181352008-06-27T18:50:00.000-07:002008-06-27T18:50:00.000-07:00qp:"Your brain lies to you" coming from the NYT......qp:<BR/>"Your brain lies to you" coming from the NYT....<BR/><BR/><BR/>Ooooooh that's rich!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-42825109015795195562008-06-27T15:49:00.000-07:002008-06-27T15:49:00.000-07:00Wow...You guys did just fine without me...and me, ...Wow...You guys did just fine without me...and me, I have just demonstrated the truism that you can't be thought a fool when you are silent but it's confirmed when you speak out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-71015388207773402582008-06-27T15:29:00.000-07:002008-06-27T15:29:00.000-07:00"What prevents the first efficient cause from bein..."What prevents the first efficient cause from being nothing?"<BR/><BR/>What prevents you from believing that you can enjoy a nice satisfying meal of barbequed nothing? Would you sit like Hume with your back to the door, and claim upon hearing the sound usually associated with a door closing, that there was no reason other than habit to believe that that sound indicated that a door had just closed behind you? To get your face pressed up that close to any attempt at proof, is to ultimately deny the possibility of knowledge and proof (which was his intent) ... and at the same time, demand proof of that!<BR/><BR/>I'm not up to speed enough on Aquinas to debate his points (though I agree, you can't <I>prove</I> God's existence to someone who isn't willing to accept it - and personally I think that is an inherent part of the deisign), but in discussing the one or more of Aristotle's four causes, you should allow for "I no 'tink that woid means what ju 'tink it means...", as this points out about <A HREF="http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/4causes.htm" REL="nofollow">The Four Causes</A>, the word typically translated as 'Cause' doesn't fully capture the meaning of the word Aristotle used, 'aition',<BR/><BR/><I>Material cause: “that from which, (as a constituent) present in it, a thing comes to be … e.g., the bronze and silver, and their genera, are causes of the statue and the bowl.”<BR/>Formal cause: “the form, i.e., the pattern … the form is the account of the essence … and the parts of the account.” <BR/>Efficient cause: “the source of the primary principle of change or stability,” e.g., the man who gives advice, the father (of the child). “The producer is a cause of the product, and the initiator of the change is a cause of what is changed.” <BR/>Final cause: “something’s end (telos)—i.e., what it is for—is its cause, as health is (the cause) of walking.” <BR/><BR/>This account makes it seem as if Aristotle is offering a catalog of causes, and is claiming that each thing has four different kinds of cause. But what the account misses is the idea that there is something ambiguous about the notion of aition. <BR/>...<BR/>Aristotle warns us of the ambiguity at 195a5: “aition is said in many ways.” This is his usual formula for telling us that a term is being used ambiguously. That is, when one says that x is the aition of y, it isn’t clear what is meant until one specifies what sense of aition is intended... This makes it hard for us to get clear on what Aristotle was up to, since neither “cause” nor “explanation” is ambiguous in the way Aristotle claims aition is. There is no English translation of aition that is ambiguous in the way (Aristotle claims) aition is. But if we shift from the noun “cause” to the verb “makes” we may get somewhere. <BR/><BR/>Aristotle’s point may be put this way: if we ask “what makes something so-and-so?” we can give four very different sorts of answer - each appropriate to a different sense of “makes.” Consider the following sentences:<BR/><BR/>1. The table is made of wood. <BR/>2. Having four legs and a flat top makes this (count as) a table. <BR/>3. A carpenter makes a table. <BR/>4. Having a surface suitable for eating or writing makes this (work as) a table. <BR/><BR/>Aristotelian versions of (1) - (4): <BR/><BR/>1a. Wood is an aition of a table.<BR/>2a. Having four legs and a flat top is an aition of a table.<BR/>3a. A carpenter is an aition of a table.<BR/>4a. Having a surface suitable for eating or writing is an aition of a table.<BR/><BR/>These sentences can be disambiguated by specifying the relevant sense of aition in each case: <BR/><BR/>1b. Wood is what the table is made out of. <BR/>2b. Having four legs and a flat top is what it is to be a table. <BR/>3b. A carpenter is what produces a table. <BR/>4b. Eating on and writing on is what a table is for. <BR/>...</I><BR/><BR/>and it goes on... but that's all the html I get for a quarter.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-4323939710348056022008-06-27T14:55:00.000-07:002008-06-27T14:55:00.000-07:00Anymouse – I ain’t good't much mor'n quot'n the Go...Anymouse – I ain’t good't much mor'n quot'n the Good Book, so I can't speak t'all that provin' God nonsense. But I can say, with absolute assurance - <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%208:3;&version=72" REL="nofollow">love God</A> and <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:28;&version=9" REL="nofollow">your life will change!</A> Do ya feel “called”…well, do ya?NoMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100042056270224683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-50512541784331242372008-06-27T14:52:00.000-07:002008-06-27T14:52:00.000-07:00Great news, Julie! Thanks for the update!Great news, Julie! Thanks for the update!Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.com