[Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 61, Issue 9 (Please, be more realistic)

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 5 Oct 2019, at 14:02, Michel Petitjean <petitjean.chiral en gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> We receive "information" from family, teachers, TV, journals,
> internet, preachers, and so on.
> I am ready to discuss about information in the context of religious
> beliefs and other beliefs, and I am ok to hear about information in
> such contexts on the FIS forum.
> The contrast is considerable between the FIS forum and what is stated
> by many Churches: "no doubt about what is taught: divin laws apply;
> doubting is a sin" (doubting deserves blame, and sometimes death, as
> say some fanatics).
> It was true along the past centuries, and alas it is still true now at
> many places.
> Older are the "fake news", more people believe in them.
> Many people doubt about the validity of the content of recent books,
> but, for older books such that holy scriptures, it is amazing to see
> that so few people doubt about the validity of their content: their
> content IS true.
> Well, I forget that there are several contents and that the hundred of
> millions of believers disagree between themselves.
> At least many millions of believers should be wrong, if not all :)
> Are my words shocking?
> If yes, apologies.
> It is ok to discuss information in scientific contexts (include social
> sciences, humanities, etc.), but if you prefer to discuss about
> information from a religious point of view, it is ok, too.
> You may decide.
> Sincerely,
> Michel.

Interesting. In the mathematical theology of the universal machine (in the arithmetical sense of Kleene, Turing, Church, Gödel) we have that doubting is not a sin, but asserting any public ontological certainty is a sin. Machine already warns us that “theology” contains a trap, making people inverting the “divine experience”, which remains and has to remain private and never publicly asserted. Some type of information only go without saying, and lead to their contrary when said. A bit like already with Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem: 

[]<>t -> ~<>t.    (Proving my consistency entails my inconsistency)

I can argue that the biggest sin is when theology has been separated from science, allowing the use of argument per authority in the domain. The god/non-god debate made us forget that the original debate was about the fundamental existence of the physical universe.

I work on the machine theology since 35 years, and I predict most of the core of quantum physics from it (theology, in the original sense of Plato) contains physics as a subbranch, and so is testable, and rather confirmed by contemporary physics. I found nature indeterminacy, non cloning of physical information, and apparent non-locality, and many-worlds, from arithmetic and mechanism a longtime before I saw that the physicists were already there. My work has been judged problematic for many philosopher for whom weak materialism is a dogma. (No problem with scientists, though).

This means I am very open to your suggestion to not avoid religion in the information science. For me, the real dividing line is in between Plato and Aristotle. That debate is systematically forbid by institutionalised weakly-materialist religion (weak materialism is the belief in a physically irreducible physical reality). 

Bruno





> 
> Michel Petitjean
> Université de Paris, BFA, CNRS UMR 8251, INSERM ERL U1133, F-75013 Paris, France
> Phone: +331 5727 8434; Fax: +331 5727 8372
> E-mail: petitjean.chiral en gmail.com (preferred),
>        michel.petitjean en univ-paris-diderot.fr
> http://petitjeanmichel.free.fr/itoweb.petitjean.html
> 
> 
> Le sam. 5 oct. 2019 à 12:26, Malcolm Dean <malcolmdean en gmail.com> a écrit :
>>> 
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2019 12:02:45 +0300
>>> From: "Krassimir Markov" <markov en foibg.com>
>>> To: "Malcolm Dean" <malcolmdean en gmail.com>, "FIS"
>>>        <fis en listas.unizar.es>
>>> Subject: [Fis] Please, be more realistic!
>>> 
>>> Dear Malcolm,
>>> "religious, mythical or esoteric kinds of thoughts" belong to the class of believing.
>>> Believing is nice psychological condition but not constructive and useful.
>>> For instance, I believe that I am a rich man, but unfortunately in real I am not!
>>> Because of this I could not take part in very interesting FIS and IS4IS conferences!
>>> Please, be more realistic!
>>> Friendly greetings
>>> Krassimir
>>> 
>> My point is that even if your bias is accepted as absolutely true, just for one moment, that does not excuse any definition of Information from having to explain their origins and functions.
>> 
>> Dismissing them as beliefs, psychological conditions, and "not constructive and useful" is not itself "constructive or useful." It is your opinion and worldview.
>> 
>> If you can explain how these kinds of thoughts originate and function, then you have the beginning of scientific dialogue. Otherwise, not. And such an explanation, for the purpose of this forum, should be limited to the nature of Information, and not other hypotheses such as we can find in Anthropology and Evolutionary Psychology.
>> 
>> Malcolm Dean
>> Editor: How Information Creates Its Observer (Lerner 2019)
>> Member, Higher Cognitive Affinity Group, BRI
>> Research Affiliate, Human Complex Systems, UCLA
>> 
>> So it is necessary for you to be abreast of everything; on the one hand, the unshakable heart of well-rounded truth, and, on the other, the opinions of mortals, in which there is no true conviction. (Parmenides, Fragment 24)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis en listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>> 
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es
>> ----------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACIN SOBRE PROTECCIN DE DATOS DE CARCTER PERSONAL
> 
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la informacin sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> Recuerde que si est suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicacin en el momento en que lo desee.
> http://listas.unizar.es
> ----------