There is no true truth the universe is an approximation.
Determine a method to calculate PI. (01)
Cheers (02)
George (03)
Quoting Patrick Durusau <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxx>: (04)
> John,
>
> John F. Sowa wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >PD> ... in the Septuagint (translation of the Hebrew Bible
> > > into Greek), which dates to fairly close to that time
> > > period, logos was used to translate dabar, or 'word' as it
> > > is loosely translated into English. Logos has a fairly wide
> > > range of meanings depending upon the writer, time period, etc.
> >
> >Unlike the other gospels, which were originally written in Aramaic,
> >John wrote directly in Greek, and he used the same words -- logos,
> >panta, and gignomai -- as in fragment #1 by Heraclitus:
> >
> > "all things (panta) come into being (gignomai) according
> > to this logos"
> >
> >
> >
> Yes, but modern readers of the Hebrew Bible seize upon words and give
> them a contemporary meaning. More obviously removed in terms of time and
> place but I think the assumption you are making is unwarranted. There is
> too little evidence other than common usage to support the argument you
> are making. It may well be true but then it may well be false as well.
>
> Noting that I am neither troubled nor encouraged whether any historical
> figure did or did not hold some particular position. It may be helpful
> to know what others have explored before but their conclusions are just
> that, their conclusions. We may well examine the same evidence and reach
> different conclusions.
>
> >The big distinction that Heraclitus made was between the ever
> >changing "physis" (nature) and the eternal "logos". This
> >distinction was critical for both Plato and Aristotle, even
> >though there were many differences in detail.
> >
> >But the critical point for Heraclitus and Plato is that the
> >logos consists of the eternal forms as opposed to the ever
> >changing physis. Aristotle acknowledged the distinction,
> >but he treated the logos as descriptive, rather than creative.
> >That is close to the modern notion, and I don't want to get
> >into debates about whether Heraclitus, Plato, or John had
> >different points of view on that question.
> >
> >
> >
> Sorry, still missing why, even assuming 'the eternal "logos"', you claim
> that has some relationship to logic. What does the eternal have to do
> with logic?
>
> >PD> ... if we define logic as broadly as John suggests, then it
> > > becomes as vacuous as "Semantic" is in current usage.
> >
> >Absolutely not. Notice the critical terms "precise" and "truth".
> >Notations that are not precise or capable of being made precise
> >are not a version of logic. And representations that do not
> >or cannot make any assertions about the truth or falsity of what
> >they represent are not logic.
> >
> >
> >
> Err, ok, is there some universal notion of "precise" and "truth" that I
> have missed along the way? I suspect both of those are as hotly debated
> as many of the other terms that have been discussed in this forum.
>
> >As an example, Peirce made the point that a portrait is not
> >an assertion. But the combination of the portrait together
> >with a label that identifies the person portrayed would be
> >an assertion that could be judged true or false. Therefore,
> >that combination would qualify as a notation for logic.
> >
> >
> >
> Excellent example of how "assertion" depends upon your point of view. I
> can certainly image a portrait being an assertion. I happen to have a
> reproduction of the Last Judgment scene hanging over my desk and I don't
> remember which figure in Hell it is but it was one of the cardinals from
> the time. He asked the Pope to force Michelangelo to change the
> painting. To which the Pope Paul III is said to have replied that even
> he could not pardon someone in Hell. Rather difficult to say whether the
> placement in Hell was a true or false assertion.
>
> Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend!
>
> Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Durusau
> Patrick@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
> Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
> Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005
>
> Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> (05)
------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent from Netspace Webmail: http://www.netspace.net.au (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|