Can't help but to butt in here ...
On Feb 1, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Randall R Schulz wrote: (01)
> On Friday 01 February 2008 17:03, John F. Sowa wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> For deep reasoning, I would insist on a representation in formal
>> logic. But for commonsense reasoning, I believe that formal
>> deduction is not necessary.
>
> How does the moniker "common-sense" become an epithet for non-formal
> reasoning?
>
> Frankly, what is it that can be captured in a digital computer that is
> anything _but_ formal? Computers execute deterministic programs. When
> the algorithms are non-deterministic, they suffer the consequences
> of "guessing" until a ... (I was going to use the "f...t..l" word!)
> successful result is obtained. (02)
<snip/> (03)
Being deterministic is not the same as being predictable. Chaos Theory/
Fractals tells us that; as does the weather. (04)
This is a canard that has fooled many folks; we do not need
probabilistic reasoning to get to interesting consequences... (05)
Frank (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)
|