[D-G] quite a short reflexion on science and computer (science(.
internet.petterson at gmail.com
Mon Sep 11 19:22:15 PDT 2017
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 rené 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
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
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
My Best Regards,
More information about the Deleuze-Guattari