tronvillain

Again, do you or do you not admit that something can be copied, such as a phone number, without the original dissapearing? When you give a simple negative or affirmative answer, perhaps we will be able to talk about something else.

[ July 18, 2002: Message edited by: tronvillain ]</p>

Keith Russell

Gosh, maybe I DO have to make this point.

Greetings:
I am having difficulty believing that we are--essentially--arguing whether or not something can be copied...

When I write a phone number down on a piece of paper, I've basically made a copy. Now, the number can be read--and memorized--by someone else, without the number vanishing from my own memory.

(It seems a bit odd to feel that I have to make this point...)

Now you can call it 'accumulation' and 'dispossession', if you want to force your audience to have to apply new words to concepts they already understand perfectly well.

But, although your words are new, your ideas are not. And, your point seems irredeemably banal.

Keith.

Mr. Sammi

Keith, I am still waiting for an educated resopnse which should stem from your first post and my subsequent reply.

I am not sure what you mean by banality AND I am not sure how you arrive at the point that my ideas are not new, seeing I may arrive at the point where I will make a claim on the "will of the world". In what way would this be not new? But perhaps you can refer yourself to my first paragraph of this post, before you try to think a suitable reply to this last question.

* * *

TRON, being a very busy man, and finding you so uneducated, I hesitate to debate your foolishness.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

emphryio

All the silly rudeness aside, I would welcome your future post telling us your claim of the will of the world.

tronvillain

Yet again, do you or do you not admit that something can be copied, such as a phone number, without the original disappearing? It seems like you do, but you never quite come out and say it. Now answer the question.

John Page

I've been perusing this thread and would offer two thoughts:

1. Change "accumulate" to "compare" or "perform comparions". It seems to me that to add something to something else, i.e. accumulate, you first have to identify the somethings (as separate from their surroundings). For example, comparison of auditory sensory data over time can pick out a specific frequency from background noise.

2. Copying information. Care should be taken in interpreting what is going on here. Creating a "perfect copy" would violate the Law of Identity (and nobody seems to have done this yet). Rather, as I think tron pointed out, information is abstract. All we're doing is copying how that information is represented. The information appears perfectly preserved because our minds extract/abstract the informational context/content so that the "meaning" within our mind is preserved.

Consider an arithmetic sum written on a piece of paper. This represents the mental operation of addition that we are performing. Our language usage commonly refers to the "sum on the piece of paper" but the writing on the paper is just a set of physcial impressions that have symbolic meaning to us.

Hope this is clear and useful.

Cheers, John

Mr. Sammi

DISPOSSESSION : to deprive (another) of the posession or occupancy of something, such as real property.
DISPENSE - to deal out in parts or portions ; distribute ; to prepare and give out.

What has transpired when the TronVillain, transfers a phone#, from his mental capabilities into physical medium? It is obvious there was some disposession involved in accumulating the ink marks on the medium. The pen or pencil or writing implement was dispossessed of some of its contents, where it was transferred and accumulated on the medium. The accumulation in a grand sense represents a phone number.

What about the number within Tronvillain's active memory systems? It has obviously obeyed the 1st indicitive of accumulation which is a necessary dispensation. Can it be said that Tronvillian was dispossessed of some mental quality concerning the phone number. It can be said in this combination mental act/physical act that Tronvillian was dispossessed of the characteristic of the condition of the phone number, dispossessed of its uniqueness.

Thus in the sense that TronVillain was not dispossessed physically of the representation, she
was nevertheless dispossessed of a quality of the
internal representation.

As it becomes clearer to all, including myself,
physical and mental accumulation have different
characteristics of disposession in the act of
accumulating but nevertheless the polar opposite
of accumulating retains its certain character of
dispensing.

* * *

Leading me to the example of copying from the physical world to the mental world. A stone in the physical world is memorised, can we show the elements which need to be accorded with accumulating the representative memory. The stone must dispense its characteristics through what is visible and presentable by the illuminating light. Of what is the stone disposessed? IS it the uniqueness of its character? OR some other abstract quality which the representative memory has accumulated? I am still immature in the respect of having this information.

What about our concerns of what has been accumulated and is percieved as a mental memory (as opposed to a physical memory)? It is easily seen the mental memory has been accumulated. It can also be deduced that the representation of the memory was accumulated due to a dispossession of mental encoders. The mental encoders were dispossessed from the set of available mental encoders and accumulated in the form of a mental memory.

So everywhere we look, at all aspects of life, living, loving, accumulation along with dispossession/dispensing is always at the base of the cause and the effect. Because it seems to me accumulating/dispensing lies at the bottom of all life, I claim that this is part of the "will of the natural world".

What remains to be seen is whether the cause be it wanting to accumulate, or wanting to dispense have their own impetus.

The philosophical and psychological effects of this dynamism is profound. Losing things due to giving them away, or having them taken away. Gaining things due to having them given to you, or due to you taking them.

The balance on which morals are based would be the sharing of the will of the natural world. Realising to share and not to give all, OR not to take all.

Sammi Na Boodie (thanks)

[ July 20, 2002: Message edited by: Mr. Sammi ]</p>