[Fis] The beginning of scientific dialogue (Please, be more realistic)
Bruno Marchal
marchal at ulb.ac.be
Sun Oct 6 09:30:16 CEST 2019
Dear Krassimir,
> On 5 Oct 2019, at 21:32, Krassimir Markov <markov en foibg.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Malcolm, Michel, Mark, and FIS Colleagues,
> Thank you for the letters!
>
> Answer to Malcolm :
>
> “If you can explain how these kinds of thoughts originate and function, then you have the beginning of scientific dialogue”.
> Yes, I can. You may see this in the paper:
>
> Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova, I. Mitov. Basic Structure of the General Information Theory. International Journal “Information Theories and Applications”, Vol.14, No.: 1, 2007. pp. 5-19. http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol14/ijita14-1-p01.pdf <http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol14/ijita14-1-p01.pdf>
Thank you for this link. It might help to see how much “non-mechanism” is required. There are reference to an external world, which is unclear to me. I think also that self-reflexive information is provided by the Löbian machine, i.e. the universal machine which knows (in the Gödel-Theatetical sense) that she is universal. That happens quickly, as a consequence of adding enough “induction axiom”. Peano arithmetic is the most well known Löbian machine. The mathematical theology I study applies to them (and are guessed-correctly by them). It helps such machine to refute all possible reductionist conception about them.
Unfortunately I have a lot of work in October and November; my comments will be rare and sparse.
>
> And also, you nay see:
> Krassimir Markov, Christophe Menant, Stanley N Salthe, Yixin Zhong, Karl Javorszky, Alex Hankey, Loet Leydesdorff, Guy A Hoelzer, Jose Javier Blanco Rivero, Robert K. Logan, Sungchul Ji, Mark Johnson, David Kirkland, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic. Data versus Information. International Journal “Information Theories and Applications”, Vol. 24, Number 4, 2017. pp. 303 -321. http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol24/ijita24-04-p01.pdf <http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol24/ijita24-04-p01.pdf>
>
>
> Answer to Michel and Mark:
>
> Both religion and science, in difference to Durkheim ( http://home.ku.edu.tr/~mbaker/cshs503/durkheimreligiouslife.pdf <http://home.ku.edu.tr/~mbaker/cshs503/durkheimreligiouslife.pdf> ),
> are created by human’s consciousness in parallel but not as consequence one from another.
>
> Yes, religious thinking is the main base for morality and social uniting and unifying as Durkheim had written.
>
> But the science is another type of thinking.
> In details I had explained this in the paper:
>
> K. Markov, S. Poryazov, K. Ivanova, I. Mitov, V. Markova. Culture Aspects of Inforaction. Proceedings of the XIII-th Int. Conf. "Knowledge-Dialogue-Solution" KDS-2007. Varna, Bulgaria. Sofia, ITHEA, 2007, pp. 625-633. International Journal INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES & KNOWLEDGE, Volume 2, 2008, Number 4, pp. 335-342. http://www.foibg.com/ijitk/ijitk-vol02/ijitk02-4-p06.pdf
>
>
> At the end, why I stress on excluding the religion from our discussions?
>
> Because all relations to believing and faith are kind of advertisement of religion but not constructive discussion.
>
> For instance, If one believes, than he/she needs only to eat fruits of special kind of tree and all knowledge will be received. No need of science and discussions!
>
> Please see for instance:
>
> Common English Bible, Book of Genesis, Chapter 3, Knowledge, not eternal life, 6 ; https://www.biblestudytools.com/ceb/genesis/3.html <https://www.biblestudytools.com/ceb/genesis/3.html>
>
> QURAN, Sura 2, The Heifer al-Baqarah, 35 : https://www.clearquran.com/002.html <https://www.clearquran.com/002.html>
>
>
> Curiously, the primary knowledge received by Adam and Eve had been lost!
> They had eaten these fruits but what they only had understood was that they were naked!
> Were they so stupid? :-)
>
> Friendly greetings
> Krassimir
I could agree of banning talk on religion based on revelation, but not on theology when done with the scientific attitude: i.e. which never claim to be true, and always proposed testable/refutable theories, like the theology of machine, which is testable as it contains the whole of physics in a deducible way.
The real sin is when we separate science and theology. That is a trick by tyran to appropriate religion, as a means for authoritarian leadership. The machine somehow already warns us: institutionalised religion can only be sort of fraud. Doubting is not a sin, public certainty is the sin.
Very often, people who say that they have no religion, are people imposing their religion to others, not always consciously. We can doubt the notion of the physical universe, or Aristotelian criteria of reality (what we see/observe/measure), as the antic dream argument is supposed to make us doubt about.
Bruno
Bruno Marchal
IRIDIA ULB
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> Prof. Dr. Krassimir Markov
> Honorary professor
> University of telecommunications and posts
> Sofia, Bulgaria
>
> President of the ITHEA® Institute of Information Theories and Applications
> and the ITHEA® International Scientific Society
>
> www.ithea.org <http://www.ithea.org/>
>
> e-mail: president en ithea.org <mailto:president en ithea.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Mark Johnson
> Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2019 6:07 PM
> To: fis
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 61, Issue 9 (Please, be more realistic)
>
> Dear all,
>
> Durkheim's analysis of the "Elementary forms of Religious Life" is not a bad starting point for clarifying what we are talking about (or in the case of Karl, what we might not want to talk about).
>
> Durkheim distinguishes "belief" from "ritual". This seems sensible. Both have an information content, don't they?
>
> The information of belief might be dismissed as "fake news" (or is that a kind of heresy?!) or not, but the information content of ritual is partly diachronic in a way that belief isn't, and presents a case where one might identify a relation between the diachronic dimension of a rite and the synchronic dimension of a belief. Theatre, music and media share these properties, and we admit them to our domain of inquiry - and they may well have their roots in ritual (see Jane Harrison - "Ancient art and Ritual"). Since our modern lives are no less replete with rituals (like writing on FIS) it seems highly relevant to explore their information content.
>
> For a more philosophical view on this, Simon Critchley's new book "Tragedy, the Greeks and Us" is excellent in his unpicking of the Platonist view of the world and upholding the diachronic ambiguity of ancient drama (and by extension, ritual, or what Critchley calls "meta-ritual")
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Mark
>
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2019, 13:03 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.
>
> 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
> ----------
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACISN SOBRE PROTECCISN DE DATOS DE CARACTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la informacisn 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 esta suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicacisn 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
> ----------
> INFORMACI�N SOBRE PROTECCI�N DE DATOS DE CAR�CTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la informaci�n 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 aplicaci�n en el momento en que lo desee.
> http://listas.unizar.es
> ----------
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20191006/77358271/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list