From: merritt@macro.bu.edu (Sean Merritt)
Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism
Subject: Re: Modern Logic -- question (was Obj. Philosophy)
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:20:20 GMT
	<1993Jan04.214429.11578@news.mentorg.com> <106150@bu.edu>
	<1993Jan05.223006.29473@news.mentorg.com>
	<TORKEL.93Jan6002412@bast.sics.se> <MERRITT.93Jan6131932@macro.bu.edu>
	<TORKEL.93Jan6213150@bugs.sics.se>
Organization: Boston University Physics Department
In-reply-to: torkel@sics.se's message of 6 Jan 93 20:31:50 GMT

In article <TORKEL.93Jan6213150@bugs.sics.se> torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen) writes:



   In article <MERRITT.93Jan6131932@macro.bu.edu> merritt@macro.bu.edu
    (Sean Merritt) writes:

      >A Turing machine could solve this problem by denying someone
      >a chute, it could not without specific input choose 5) that
      >is a human's are capaple of this. If I provide the TM with 
      >the data that chutes can be used by one or two people it
      >will again fall in line with human decisions. 
      >Can you offer a counter Objective analysis that does not use
      >math or logic at some level? Do so then. But if you do
      >than you have brought the consequences of Godel's Theorem
      >into play. For the specific conjecture above a TM may
      >or may not halt. Humans will reach a decision no matter what. 

#     I can't make sense of any of this. On what do you base the claims
#   about Turing machines, and how does Godel come into it? And what is
#   the intended point of it all?

If we go back to mathematics, If a Turing machine cannot
calculate something than niether can a human mind.
You say that there is no mathematical consequences of
applying Objectivism, but this patently false.

If you use Logic however slightly to temper your Rationality
there are certain mathematical facts which influence you.
You can ignore these "facts" but they are part of `objective
reality' so you are in effect choosing to ignore part of
reality, therefore your view is critically flawed.

If the basis of Objectivity is not Cognition, what is it?  

If you accept the role of conciuosness, then we have a very
useful tool in that we can make a machince that will
produce succesful startegies/contingencies of human-like behaviuor
based on PURE Logic I say that these will look like Rational
actions/decisions until a conjecture that forces an inconsistancy
with logic arises. At that point you would assume that your
subject was a non-human, and to follow a rational course
one would need to toss logic aside and make a Subjective
judgement. The Turing machine cannot resolve this situation since
it cannot abandon logic. It fails to make a decision and it's
apparent Rational behaviour ends(infact it is stuck in a loop
and does nothing at all).
If you have em
There are many suceessful programs out there
like the chess playing programs that are TM's working within
an axiomatic system producing results that humans would produce
without conciousness.

Still computers and thier programs make no act of Cognition.

The basis of Objectivity requires first a totally Subjective act
of Cognition to get started at all. 

-sjm
--
Sean J. Merritt		         | "Every revolt is a cry of innocence    
Dept of Physics Boston University|  and an appeal to the essence of being."
merritt@macro.bu.edu             | Albert Camus, The Rebel