Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - H

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 156
1
Loved the paper - Meillassoux really gets to the heart of the problem. Randomness as Hyper Chaos is not some mish-mash of pre-Creation chaos with all substance being indeterminate. That suggests a Probablity Law that impinges on stability.

Since Hyper Chaos doesn't adhere even to Probability Laws, Everything can arise in seeming Orderly fashion and continue to work that way for trillions of years...or even Forever...

Right, his point, seemed to me, to be that we have no real way of knowing if Laws will stand in the next moment only because they happened to have stood in the previous one.

Here are two more links:
http://www.uhimik.ru/download/31550.pdf
(The site is in Russian, but if you complete the captcha and hit the button, it will download.)

http://heavysideindustries.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Potentiality-and-Virtuality-Quentin-Meillasoux.pdf

Meillasoux really digs into the heart of the problem, that the True Materialism would have to become rational by the extinguishing of Natural Laws.

I need to dig deeper into these links (can't get the Russian site to work for me) but I am still unsure about where he positions the Logical Universals necessary for the rational in this. Of course any reductionist account has to find a way to square this problem of how to account for the authority of logic, probably why I'm more on the Platonist's side here...

Does this link work for you?

I actually haven't been able to get time to really dig in to any of them.  I guess I superficially understood his point as being that there was no real way we could know why laws are laws, or that we can't know, for certain, that laws will continue to be laws?

2
Sorry what I mean is there's Science that has gone from theory to, at the least, being able to produce laptops and drugs that really work well.

Then there's "in play" Scientific Hypotheses like, for example, a possible underlying reality consisting of quantum information from which Space & Time "emerge". Or arguably even more generally accepted aspects of quantum theory that haven't yet produced any technology?

Well, not knowing exactly what we could apply it to doesn't forgo it being useful.  For all we know, we could find faster than light travel by way of it.  I mean, chances are against it, but we don't know for certain what really lies past that conceptual horizon.  I think we are at pains to take it seriously.

It's just hard to do that when you can't "pay" for the research with practical, money making dividends...

3
Ah gotcha. Yeah I think this gets into the same issues brought up by Hyper Chaos - what makes us so confident we're finding deep truths about Reality rather than contextual truths that happen to work well enough?

Right, that's what Chomsky was getting at (I think) in that video a while back about how the bar got lowered, after the "failure" of mechanical philosophy, from "definitively True" to "True enough."  That is, if something is predictive "enough" than it is "true enough."

Additionally, is the only Science we can take seriously the aspects which produce reliable technology?

Hmm, that's interesting.  It think I'd need to think a bit harder on that.  But what is an example of science that doesn't produce technology and so isn't taken seriously?

4
Hmmm...not sure I understand fully but yeah they might not care about science as a pursuit. Yet if there are variations of regularities in the Universe then those entities which can travel at least across large swaths of our galaxy would [possibly] have to deal with, say, different universal constants.

Of course we could also just figure out if reality is Dappled by finding specific exceptions. We wouldn't really know until we built [more] tech based off quantum mechanics right?

Well, part of the problem of consciousness, and of conscious thought, is that we don't really access facts as such, rather facts through our perceptual and conscious heuristics, right?  So, inevitably, there is a problem of how those heuristics just fail to allow us knowledge passed a place where they just aren't able to go.  There simply might not actually be any heuristics capable of comprehending the full complexity of the universe.

5
We're probably just too young a species and too limited to grasp the right metaphysical picture here.

Synthetic life-forms that can travel across space with greater ease and greater memory/cognition likely have a better handle on what laws are universally applied.

Or so I hope...

Probably depends on how they/we solve the problem of heuristics.  That is, how those "beings" don't end up suffering the same problem of imagining the part as a whole.  If that is even possible. If facts are even close to infinite, how do we/they know which to "safely" ignore?  And if values come from heuristics, broadly, do we imagine these future beings would even care about such metaphysical problems?

6
Loved the paper - Meillassoux really gets to the heart of the problem. Randomness as Hyper Chaos is not some mish-mash of pre-Creation chaos with all substance being indeterminate. That suggests a Probablity Law that impinges on stability.

Since Hyper Chaos doesn't adhere even to Probability Laws, Everything can arise in seeming Orderly fashion and continue to work that way for trillions of years...or even Forever...

Right, his point, seemed to me, to be that we have no real way of knowing if Laws will stand in the next moment only because they happened to have stood in the previous one.

Here are two more links:
http://www.uhimik.ru/download/31550.pdf
(The site is in Russian, but if you complete the captcha and hit the button, it will download.)

http://heavysideindustries.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Potentiality-and-Virtuality-Quentin-Meillasoux.pdf

7
Literature / Re: YOU MUST TELL ME ... What else are you reading?
« on: November 16, 2018, 07:04:39 pm »
Random question, but are any of the Star Wars books worth reading?

Heir To the Empire (first book of the Thrawn Trilogy) which is not canonical anymore, is far and away the best.  Everything else is pretty poorly done and not at all worth the time.  The other two in the trilogy are also similarly good, but I would advise reading one and not the rest.  Honestly, they are probably better Star Wars stories than any of the actual Star Wars stories.

8
The Unholy Consult / Re: "Kellhus is dead, but not done."
« on: November 15, 2018, 03:03:14 pm »
We're on the same page about it, then! It's nice to know I'm not the only one who sees it this way.

In the "old days" having been "raised" on reading White Wolf RPG books, I conceived of the Outside as a "Shadowlands" akin to what is in the game system of Wraith: The Oblivion.  That is, a world mapped over the world, separate yet connected, but "mirrored" in a way.  Any notion of that though is really shattered by Koringhus' revelations and by the views we get of it via Kellhus short forays into it.

If we were to consider the entirety of Bakker-verse a sphere (which it specifically is not, but just for the sake of illustrating this idea) then the Outside is what is inside the sphere.  In "reality" there is no "space" there just as there is no sphere.  Of course, this analogy fails to capture numerous things, but it does encapsulate the space-that-is-not-space aspect of that paradoxical nature of the Outside.  The Outside is far more a "place" in the Platonic sense than it is a "physical" one.

9
The Unholy Consult / Re: "Kellhus is dead, but not done."
« on: November 15, 2018, 02:28:47 pm »
I understand what you mean, but our minds would see dimensions even if there is none (even in reality), since they are wired that way, or, more specifically, since this framework of understanding is taught in school, which is why it's useful for explaining concepts to readers. But it's not the only way, and a limited one at that. The Outside is a place of souls, which aren't a physical concept. It's more to do with philosophy and the notion of thought than with the concept of physical space.

Well, one issue of trying to conceptualize the Outside as a "dimension" is that it does not map to physical dimensions in any 1:1 way.  In fact, it specifically does not map onto the axis of time or space, because it, at best, would be mapped below these things.  That is to say, it is not a "higher order" but a "lower" one, where time and space are not distinct.  Of course, the paradox seeps in here, where there are analogies of time and space within the Outside, but again, those don't match the same things on the Inside.

Basically, along the lines of the Koringhus Revelations, the Outside is more akin to a singularity than it is to a 4th (or Nth) dimension.  Being a singularity though, of course, paradoxes not only abound, they are part and parcel of it's structure and nature.

10
The Unholy Consult / Re: "Kellhus is dead, but not done."
« on: November 14, 2018, 08:43:25 pm »
Well, I think a major portion of why the Outside can't just be "another dimension" is that, if it were, it makes very little sense that it could be "closed off."  I mean, it could be, but I think the whole aim of the 144k, the No-God and the Consult/Progenitor plan is that the "reality" of the Outside can be rewritten, in the right circumstances, when only the proscribed number of survivors are present and in a place where "meaning" is malleable.

I guess we could recapitulate the famous question as: if every Souled thing was dead, is there an Outside?  I think, confusingly enough, the answer is both yes and no.

11
Philosophy & Science / Re: The Best from "Quillette"
« on: November 14, 2018, 08:13:32 pm »
Hence, conspiracy is attractive as it includes the "smarties" from the other side. If the other side is "wrong", either they're just not getting it or they're suffering from it or they're in on it.

Right, plus that also appeals to "individuality" and "differentiation" in that it allows people to stake out ground that marks them as "special" or "unique."

12
The Unholy Consult / Re: "Kellhus is dead, but not done."
« on: November 14, 2018, 07:52:41 pm »
I've always thought that the outside was another dimension that we physically can't turn and walk into. That's why Bakker uses Orthogonal, the outside is everywhere length breadth height and time are like a 5th dimension. The Ciphrang godling in the arc just had the ability to move in that direction and go back to the outside. Also since it's at Orthogonal to time as well that means can see all time as well. If you imagine a 2D creature or an ant on a huge mobius loop, walking for ever. It would look to the ant it was walking in a straight line. but to someone able to perceive 3 dimensions it would actually be walking in a figure of 8 as we could see the whole.

I don't think they have to be mutually elusive though.  As in, the Outside can be both an inter-subjective sapce and also "Orthogonal" to physical space.  It doesn't really square up for the Outside to be akin to a physical space to me, but it also shares a number of characteristics similar to a physical space.  I think that kind of paradoxical nature is exactly what Bakker was aiming at.

13
General Misc. / Re: Is anyone else blown away by this or is it just me?
« on: November 14, 2018, 06:01:30 pm »
Exactly - there is no table - and not speaking in some meta-physical/philosophical/whatever-ical sense, it's not there. It's a slightly denser "collection" of atoms/molecules "different" from other collections and our minds cooked up an interpretation of it so we can interact with it.

This is why I am apt to put forth the idea that our mental representations, and so our ideas, are actually more real than anything we can term subjective reality.

Consider the following example: you buy a new house and it is empty of furniture.  You get in a box, take the contents out, regarding the packaging as "garbage."  Only now you realize that whatever this thing is, you need a place to assemble it, possibly because it will be a messy process.  Now, the box that was "garbage" is now, "table."  Upon being done with said assembly, the "box," once "garbage" now "table" returns again to "garbage."  All while still being the same physical object.

The point of this poor allusion being, of course, to illustrate your point that things only exist how we conceptualize them to.  That is, the conception is what is real, to us.  We cannot interact with that which we cannot conceive of.

14
Philosophy & Science / Re: The Best from "Quillette"
« on: November 14, 2018, 05:41:36 pm »
There does seem to be a need, at least among moderns of the West, to argue that their pre-rational/irrational commitments are (or will be) satisfied by evidence. That's what Quilette and what one takes as its liberal counterforce, Vox, seem to run on.

But I wonder if that's true beyond the confines of the dedicated interlocutors in Internet spaces. Does your average moderate or even conservative/liberal worry too much about the importance of Reason? I suspect there may be a silent majority more interested in being Reasonable which includes but isn't exclusive to the easily manipulable claim of Rationality.

Maybe I am just off, but I don't think either "side" is too apt to consider their position is plausibly rooted nearly totally in irrationality.  In fact, it's levied at the other side time and time again. No one really seems to realize the implications of that simple fact, or no one really care to try to address it.  Probably because it's near impossible now.[/quote]

Having thought about this a bit more, but isn't a symptom of this "appeal to rationality" belied in both side's penchant for labeling the other as "stupid?"  As in, their side has the onus of Reason behind it, while those other's, well, they are just not smart enough to grasp the superiority of The Argument.

15
The Unholy Consult / Re: "Kellhus is dead, but not done."
« on: November 13, 2018, 08:07:59 pm »
That's why I'm not sure about the aforementioned framework being completely workable. It might be incomplete, with the Inchoroi being just one more experiment. Then the Inverse Fire cannot be seen as conclusive proof of anything.

But I doubt it's going to be relevant.

It's proof that Damnation is real.  It just doesn't mean that Damnation is certain.  But with the propensity for souled things to want to maintain Identity, it is the Goad, because the only way out of the whole trap is the give up/in.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 156