The first cause argument

[Polymath257]

What on earth does that mean?
I said that concepts are realised through physical means, and you are saying that concepts cease to exist when "physical things with intelligence" don't exist.

Yes. Just like thoughts and emotions cease to exist when those living things that have such thoughts and emotions cease to exist.

Concepts are *our* way of classifying things around us.

I simply disagree. If all intelligence in physical objects ceased to exist when the objects did, it wouldn't be possible to reproduce what we understand to be intelligent.

The concept of Intelligence can't disappear and reappear with objects. That is not coherent.

I strongly disagree here, based on the evidence. There was nothing intelligent anywhere in the universe 13 billion years ago. There was nothing alive on Earth 4 billion years ago. I'm not sure where the boundary for intelligence is, but there was certainly no intelligent life on Earth prior to 500 million years ago.

Intelligence is simply a form of information processing that certain physical things do. It isn't a separate thing that exists independently of physical things.

I would also point out that there is no intelligence in any single cell, but somewhere between conception and age 25, an intelligence comes into being.

 

[muhammad_isa]

There was nothing intelligent anywhere in the universe 13 billion years ago..

..and what do you mean by that?
If the concept of intelligence could appear and disappear with physical objects, there would be no effective communication of concept.

Imagine if you were actually there 13 billion years ago .. would the concept of intelligence only exist because you did?

 

[Polymath257]

..and what do you mean by that?
If the concept of intelligence could appear and disappear with physical objects, there would be no effective communication of concept.

Yes. Communication happens between intelligent agents. So if there are no intelligent agents, there is no communication.

Imagine if you were actually there 13 billion years ago .. would the concept of intelligence only exist because you did?

Yes. No intelligence would be around to have a concept. A concept is simply a type of thought.

Think of it like this. The concept of a 'game' didn't exist until people invented the first game. The concept of a 'chair' didn't exist until someone first used something as a chair. The *concept* of a molecule didn't exist until very recently (it was invented in the early 1800's).

A concept is different than the item or process that it signifies. Atoms existed since the very early universe. The *concept* of an atom did not.

 

[muhammad_isa]

A concept is simply a type of thought..

..so maths is a type of thought, and numbers only exist when a person "invents" the concept?
I think not.

 

[ppp]

..so maths is a type of thought, and numbers only exist when a person "invents" the concept?
I think not.

But numbers don't exist as independent entities..

 

[muhammad_isa]

But numbers don't exist as independent entities..

The concept exists. It has always existed.

I don't believe that intelligence biologically evolved, and has anything to do with dna.

 

[ppp]

The concept exists. It has always existed.

I see no evidence that you know, or have the ability to know that.

 

[Polymath257]

..so maths is a type of thought, and numbers only exist when a person "invents" the concept?
I think not.

Yes, absolutely. We invented numbers because they help us with certain 'conserved' quantities in ordinary life. Other animals seem to have that concept as well, but I don't see any reason to think that the concept of 3 had any existence before some animal started using it.

 

[Polymath257]

The concept exists. It has always existed.

Clearly not, I think. We invent concepts all the time. Before very recently, there was no concept of a 'computer' as we understand them today. There was no concept of 'gasoline' before the chemistry was discovered. There was no concept of 'electrons' before a little over a century ago.

Concepts are things *we* make up to help us classify things about the world around us.

More specifically, the concept of number was developed by some animal in the past to keep track of how many things it had, whether nuts or whatever. We probably inherited an elementary concept of number sense from our primate ancestors.

I don't believe that intelligence biologically evolved, and has anything to do with dna.

Again, that seems to be contradicted by the actual evidence of animal intelligence and its relation to genetics.

 

[Polymath257]

But numbers don't exist as independent entities..

More specifically, there are a great many numbers about which nobody has ever thought and so no concept of that number exists.

Before Graham's number was dreamed up, there was no concept of that number:

Graham's number - Wikipedia

 

[ppp]

More specifically, there are a great many numbers about which nobody has ever thought and so no concept of that number exists.

Before Graham's number was dreamed up, there was no concept of that number:

Graham's number - Wikipedia

Damn, I forgotten about that. Back in junior high, a friend and I tried to write an algorithm to generate it on my Vic 20. To no avail. Surprise surprise

 

[Polymath257]

Damn, I forgotten about that. Back in junior high, a friend and I tried to write an algorithm to generate it on my Vic 20. To no avail. Surprise surprise

Oh, it's easy enough to write a program that would compute it. Finding a computer with enough capacity to run the program is another matter.

 

[ppp]

Oh, it's easy enough to write a program that would compute it. Finding a computer with enough capacity to run the program is another matter.

Our math wasn't quite up to the the challenge back then. But yeah, if we had been able to write it, my computer would have gone up in a puff of smoke and logic.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Concepts are things *we* make up to help us classify things about the world around us..

So, in reality, the scientific method has been "made up", and all the conclusions we can come to about the universe are "made up".

I don't think we are getting anywhere here. It seems to me like the idea of concepts not "being real" is made up.

 

[muhammad_isa]

More specifically, there are a great many numbers about which nobody has ever thought and so no concept of that number exists.

What about infinity?
Did that concept not exist before we "made it up"?

If so, then how could the universe have an infinite amount of causes, because the concept would not have existed if it is only in our minds?

 

[Polymath257]

So, in reality, the scientific method has been "made up", and all the conclusions we can come to about the universe are "made up".

Yes, of course. They are our best guess for how things work. Now, we have extensively tested those guesses, but the concepts are made up by us.

I don't think we are getting anywhere here. It seems to me like the idea of concepts not "being real" is made up.

For example, the question of whether Pluto is a planet or not. There is no concept 'out there' of what a planet is. *WE* choose how to classify the things that are out there. And one of the designations *we* have invented is the concept of a planet. Pluto is out there no matter how we classify it. But the 'concept' of a planet is ours to choose.

Concepts are as 'real' as any of our thoughts and ideas. They help us to classify things and to organize how we deal with things. But they are things *we* make up in order to help us organize our behavior.

 

[Polymath257]

What about infinity?
Did that concept not exist before we "made it up"?

Like all concepts, the concept of infinity is made up by us. Whether there are infinite things or amounts is not.

If so, then how could the universe have an infinite amount of causes, because the concept would not have existed if it is only in our minds?

You are confusing the concept (a thought that we have) with the reality (what is out there).

The concept of an atom didn't exist until recently. Atoms, however, did.

In the case of infinity, the *concept* was invented by us. Whether or not there was an infinite regress of causes was not.

As another example, the concept of one hundred was invented by us. But there were certainly more than a hundred things in the universe before we invented the concept.

I think the basic mistake you are making is thinking the concept is required for the reality.

 

[Polymath257]

Our math wasn't quite up to the the challenge back then. But yeah, if we had been able to write it, my computer would have gone up in a puff of smoke and logic.

I sometimes teach a finite math class that is primarily taken by computer science students. One thing I do is give a very short 'dangerous program' that computes Ackermann numbers. I tell them not to actually run the program unless they want their computer to freeze. Because it will.

Ackermann number

 

[ppp]

I sometimes teach a finite math class that is primarily taken by computer science students. One thing I do is give a very short 'dangerous program' that computes Ackermann numbers. I tell them not to actually run the program unless they want their computer to freeze. Because it will.

Ackermann number

I don't remember those. What class would that have been in?

 

[muhammad_isa]

I think the basic mistake you are making is thinking the concept is required for the reality.

Playing with words.