I agree with the active role of the interpreter in communication. But I would also add an active role of the interpreted. Here it can be said that the...
I agree only if we take into account that the shape of the object is distinguished from the information that will be created later. Since nothing is t...
In that case, as I understand it, the bulk of clay is informed, but no longer in the sense of the result but in the sense of the act. The result is a ...
I cannot say that information is the form in a substance. Information as I conceive it is the act of informing. That is, to cause significant effects ...
1. I cannot speak of information as something that is interpreted because that makes us speak of it as a substance. But there is interpretation as the...
In this case it is not so much the properties of the document if is the same for both, as the conditions imposed by the interpreters. Both have the sa...
I would not reduce the interpreter to a mind for all cases. A computer can in-form itself by acting as an interpreter as soon as there is a process le...
In both cases the information is presupposed on the side of the interpreted. A correct expression according to my theory would be, "In-form me!" In th...
Imagine that you use that USB flash drive to access a Paper you have composed. Now think about the memory itself, do you really see the Paper (the sup...
There is a text by Heidegger in which he speaks of the principle of reason and criticizes it in a certain sense. In the text he speaks of something mo...
If we accept the scissors argument, we accept the idea of a universe that is out of the hands of a supposed creator and designer. In other words, God ...
I claim that it is an argument against intelligent design. We can talk about the creator of the scissors or the creator of the universe. In both cases...
So you are not talking about scissors determined by the external agent, the great creator of scissors. You are talking about self-organizing systems. ...
Well, that's a concept. But I'm afraid experience contradicts it. We can give many uses to a scissors, why discriminate between one and another more t...
Ok lets talk about scissors. What I'm saying is actually quite simple. Think of other uses we can put those scissors to - which indeed it has. Those d...
In reality what happens is that we introduce intentions into the events. But what we introduce (an intention) is never proven, not even a posteriori. ...
And yet we can build a whole body of knowledge, neurology, from the conscious study of what we call the brain. This implies, by right, an epistemologi...
In your example of iron, a path of decomposition, reduction and reconstruction is still possible. In these paths you find the parts that constitute th...
For me it is simply necessary to accept that irreducibility is a fact. The contents of consciousness are not reducible to the contents of physics, but...
When you speak of principle it reminds me a little of Hegel for whom the spirit is an active principle or process of reality as opposed to the concept...
The question is whether the banana event repeats itself we always have a causal explanation. Hume would say yes. Another thing is to try to know the d...
Then you are contradicting yourself. Since before you had said that the brain, the subject, the experience made of what the senses give us something c...
Don't bother. You really believe that thoughts, feelings, intentions and purposes travel through the air when two people talk to each other. Imagine a...
If you look closely at what you have said, in no case is there a transmission of something. You speak of indirect relations as that of an agent presup...
From my point of view even the notion of transmission is problematic. Intentions and thoughts do not travel through the air. The only thing we have at...
I have no problem with an intention being the cause of the characteristics of something written in ink. But it is one thing to be the cause and anothe...
Yes, it would. But that is precisely what does not hold. If intentions and purposes were somehow in the ink (for me that is pure fantasy) there would ...
In fact the purpose is absent in the note. I repeat, this is because if it were not absent we would be talking about something similar to the ghost in...
The purpose here is absent because the absent of the autor and is partly a cause for misunderstanding. Because the interpretative power of a note by i...
You are doing nothing other than categorically denying what I state. But without argument. That language we share is actively exposed in the note, but...
Then it is like when we say that from a given neuronal synapse we cannot deduce a thought. If so, then there is no reduction and we must say that the ...
That is in fact false. Because the mental contents are not in the note as a ghost in the letters. The note is alone and it is exerting a constraint on...
You are ignoring that the use we think we can make of the note is delimited by the note itself. It is like a command that interacts with us. And above...
If we see a note on a refrigerator according to our use of words we can understand what it says. However it should be noted that the note has an activ...
You say that experience is coherent because the object is coherent, but at the same time you accept that coherence is given from the subject. Which im...
But that is really the question. How can you talk about constituents without that being more than a naive intuition that cannot be carried out in scie...
Well, then it does not explain this specific set of abstract principles. But don't you think that a fundamental and general ontology should explain th...
I doubt it. You have said: "you'll never be able to understand the abstract principles and general patterns of human psychology by speaking in terms o...
The fundamental (foundationalism) is precisely what should be criticized if it is not an explanatory ontology. It would be better to maintain a plural...
I'm curious, what is the difference between physics and a physical ontology? And also, doesn't thermodynamics work with the heat produced by a system?...
I think you refer to experience as a tabula rasa. But haven't you read Kant? the subject structures that which provides us with the senses. In that se...
This reminds me of Kant's critique of the Cartesian cogito. Kant said that we cannot perceive ourselves except as phenomena and not as things in thems...
I agree. Consciousness does not fit into what Aristotle called Ousia. In fact in his writings on time Aristotle stated that beings (Ousia) are not in ...
Comments