(urth) barrington interview

António Marques entonio at gmail.com
Wed Oct 8 09:36:15 PDT 2014


I'm not discarding anything. I'm not saying the crow can't compute. I'm
saying we don't know how the crow's computation works, and specifically if
it is anything like our own math.
For the record, crows being close relatives, and octopi* essentially being
only a bit farther away (tho I'm intrigued by a suggestion I've seen that
Mollusks aren't even coelomates), I might bet that their equivalent of math
isn't much different from ours. But unless they evolve to express it in
some meta-language, we won't know.

(*) Normally I wouldn't place this disclaimer here, but I think it's best
to avoid any discussion on one of my favourite plurals, and metazoan
phylogeny at that (we meatfolk are all so similar, really).

On 8 October 2014 17:07, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Antonio - I think that *that* is the genetic fallacy. You are discarding
> the evidence of the crow because of where it comes from.
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:38 AM, António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The point is that no one knows how the crow does his math. The crow may
>> look at it in a way similar to our addition and subtraction, or in a
>> different enough way. Again, what we're questioning is not the universal
>> applicability of our math, rather its universality as a computing tool.
>>
>> No dia 08/10/2014, às 16:07, "Norwood, Frederick Hudson" <
>> NORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> escreveu:
>>
>> > Actually, crows can do simple math.  If four hunters enter a house and
>> three come out, the crow can do enough math to avoid the house.  Four
>> hunters in, four come out, the crow flies to the house.  Twenty hunters in,
>> nineteen out, the crow flies to the house.  The crow can see the difference
>> between three and four but not between nineteen and twenty.
>> >
>> > I do not believe there is an alien race for which four (the concept,
>> not the symbol) is less than three.
>> >
>> > For a good science fiction story on this subject, read "Omnilingual" by
>> H. Beam Piper.
>> >
>> > Rick Norwood
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee
>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 10:57 AM
>> > To: urth at urth.net
>> > Subject: (urth) barrington interview
>> >
>> >> Thomas Bitterman: Is there an argument against the universality of
>> mathematics
>> >
>> >> that isn't  just the Genetic Fallacy?
>> >
>> >
>> > By Genetic Fallacy I assume you mean this:
>> >
>> >> The genetic fallacy, also known as fallacy of origins, fallacy of
>> virtue,[1]
>> >
>> >> Is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based
>> solely on
>> >
>> >> something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or
>> context
>> >
>> >
>> > My objection to the assumption that math is universally applicable is
>> because
>> >
>> > math originates from the mind of one species on one planet in a very
>> small
>> >
>> > corner of one galaxy in a universe of a (perhaps) infinite number of
>> galaxies.
>> >
>> >
>> > As I understand it, the Genetic Fallacy would apply if math had been
>> found outside
>> >
>> > that original context. For example, if we found math being used by
>> members of
>> >
>> > another species from outside our solar system or galaxy. Or if we had
>> travelled
>> >
>> > to all corners of the universe and found math applicable everywhere,
>> not just
>> >
>> > from the perspective of planet earth.
>> >
>> >
>> > But currently (as far as I know) math is used only by that one species
>> on that
>> >
>> > one planet.
>> >
>> >
>> > I wouldn't claim it is impossible for math to be universal. I would
>> only say that it
>> >
>> > seems unlikely to me. The fact that everything we encounter can be
>> described
>> >
>> > mathematically seems most likely due to human limitations on what we
>> are able
>> >
>> > to encounter.
>> >
>> >
>> > In other words, we simply can't see what we can't see.  The assumption
>> of a cosmic
>> >
>> > universality to our mammalian-evolved perceptions and thoughts seems
>> unfounded
>> >
>> > to me.
>> >
>> >
>> > Of course, if we are talking Special Creation and math as a special
>> mastery for
>> >
>> > understanding the universe, as bestowed upon us by God, then that's a
>> different story.
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Urth Mailing List
>> > To post, write urth at urth.net
>> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Urth Mailing List
>> > To post, write urth at urth.net
>> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20141008/5f508412/attachment-0003.htm>


More information about the Urth mailing list