From internet.petterson at gmail.com Mon Sep 11 19:22:15 2017 From: internet.petterson at gmail.com (Johnatan Petterson) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 04:22:15 +0200 Subject: [D-G] quite a short reflexion on science and computer (science(. Message-ID: hola todo. que tal vosotros? here is the reflexion i wanted to share with you: - could we see an analogy, or a parallelism, or a translation, between darwin and ren? descartes? do I like the scientific paradigm, which is about the requisite for science to be reproducible experience? (as regards to dawkins, i totally and unequovocally question the idea of a replication (cfr memes) and see it as pure variation, or rather a kind of processuality, or "languages" of lives, taking places, flows advancing, together or egoistically, whatever...) but i make some analogy between this situation, and darwin's evolution theory, or rather its discovery and propagation as something which makes sense. and i take in consideration as well nietzsche's view about it, his reaction: when he said that "the weak survives, or wins, not the strong". i carry forward my reflexion , with - scuse my name dropping, but i rehandle spinoza's action and passion development in ethics: - the cogito is like the action, and the slave, the passion. the cogito learns to love the passion (i don't think computers can do this, i think its a bug ahead for future "artificial" intelligence, i am wondering if computer anyway (can be "said" [by themselves] to) have passions, if we consider n dimension order and the illusion "of" or "in" the idea of replication. but, would you say, there are instincts, that we copy and paste in our children by very diverse ways. i think the "copy and paste" is a meme itself or a block. i wonder if computer is not such a chain, enabler of block. as cogito, we can become able to learn to choose to be the "we" in the "we copy and paste" part. or not. that's my reflexion or self discussion and enquiry, so far. it shall be continued, may-be not here, and in another way, different way, for sure. but for the moment i had to ask if somebody who happens to read and is answer enabled, to tell the forum if what you think: edward said in orientalism (one of first chapters) says that David Hume (and Adam Smith) have proven to say both very fascist statements. I think he says something like they have proven themselves quite faschist people, is this not true? Do you know what is the Source of Edward Said in that opinion, as to what concerns David Hume's writing? It could be a very fascistoid statement (thus an extract, a 'quote' in the text written by D.H. that could be matched as 'fashistic' by, say an Artifical Intelligence bot.), or something that is very knowledgable about him in the Anglo-Saxon world of books that I am not very well learned into. (may-be it does not matter that much if you want to appear online to opine to the contrary or to the affirmative, but it would anyhow help my offline thoughts, my studyes, i reckon') Thank You! (in advance) My Best Regards, John.