Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA13979 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 8 Apr 2001 11:13:14 +0100 Message-ID: <000f01c0c019$5a766d80$8d08bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <20010403141707.AAA24302%camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]> <3AC9E466.7059FC06@bioinf.man.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Determinism Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 12:47:07 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Taylor <Christopher.Taylor@man.ac.uk>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: Determinism
> Nothing is a causeless thing.
<< In a pure waffle philosophical way, IMO no, there has to be " cause "
to make it " nothing " or to make it ' no- thing '.
" Nothing " can 't exist outside a ( knownable) causal reference to make it/
or to call it " nothing ".
On the other hand " nothing " as represented as it is, that is to be '
nothing '
can 't be known(able), or can 't let itself be known to us as such for that
matter. If it does, it wouldn 't be " nothing ", but something called "
nothing ".
" Nothing " can 't express or imposs itself as such.
" Nothing " presented, lets say as an " entity " can 't be known, can 't be
seen or either can 't be found. In either case if you knew what " nothing "
is, it wouldn 't be nothing anymore, if you can see " no- thing " let me
know and if you find " nothing " I will sell it for you.
But all the jokes aside, " nothing " is IMO empty, not existable without
a verbal reference. " Nothing " exist only in our human environment.
Maybe there is something " nothing " out there in the vast universe, but
than again we can 't see/ feel/ experience/ known/.... this as such and in
itself it can 't let itself be seen/ felt/ experienced/ known, and I do
agree,
and therefore undeterminable.
" Nothing " as the thing as such is unthinkable. If we do, can, should or
would it is no- thing anymore.... but some- thing.
In addition, someone wrote/ asked if there was an example of a confirmed
uncaused result !? Sorry, can 't remerber who it was....
Anyway, I 'm not a expert in the area but couldn 't be the financial world
be an example !?
I mean, on the exchange markets they are working with confirmed results
not even caused yet, no !? Some future results are just predicted bound
to happen, no !? If we look closely to what ' experts ' say/ predict what
possibly is bound to happen if this or that would happen is that not the
same as what we are looking for !?
What for example Greenspan, that USA fellow of the National Bank does,
lies in the line of what we are searching for...
Just an idea, could be wrong all the way though !!
Best
Kenneth
( I am, because we are) everybody 's cause to exist
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 08 2001 - 11:16:02 BST