RE: virus: TT

David McFadzean (
Sun, 03 Nov 1996 16:12:26 -0700

At 10:45 PM 01/11/96 +0000, Hakeeb A. Nandalal wrote:
>Oddly enough, I've always thought that the truth was something which only
concerned us i.e. humans. No humans =
>No truth. Animals have no need for it, in fact while I'm spending a few
minutes thinking about the truth, some
>nocturnal predator is looking for food which would ensure its survival.
Therefore contemplating the truth is a
>human luxury because I just had a can of soup.

I agree that humans are the only animals that philosophize about truth, but
truth is something that concerns any intentional agent, meaning any entity
whose behaviour is at least partially driven by an internal representation
of the world. This includes all humans and animals, and I believe the notion
can be usefully extended to computer programs, robots, control systems, and
perhaps even something as simple as an instrument such as a thermostat. In
short, anything that can be "wrong" or "mistaken".

>Therefore "our" reality is a subset of "true" reality. True reality could
never be fully appreciated because of
>the infinite number of senses that would be required. The "imagery" that
bats get by bouncing radar off cave
>walls and dogs get by sniffing hydrants would forever be a mystery to us.
Of course a "simple" thing like
>colour is lost on them. Maybe the physicists among us could discuss
quantum fields as something to be sensed.

I agree that subjective reality is a subset of true (or objective) reality,
but for a different reason. An infinite number of senses wouldn't help because
in each case what you perceive is an interaction with objective reality, not
objective reality in and of itself. So no matter how many senses you add to
your repertoire, the reality you perceive would still be subjective.

David McFadzean       
Memetic Engineer      
Church of Virus