47 Message 47: From extropians-request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Wed Aug 4 13:05:47 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA07955; Wed, 4 Aug 93 13:05:45 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from panix.com by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA22516; Wed, 4 Aug 93 13:04:42 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by panix.com id AA05338 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for more@usc.edu); Wed, 4 Aug 1993 15:52:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 15:52:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199308041952.AA05338@panix.com> To: Exi@panix.com From: Exi@panix.com Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: August 4, 373 P.N.O. [19:52:05 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@gnu.ai.mit.edu Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Wed, 4 Aug 93 Volume 93 : Issue 215 Today's Topics: [4 msgs] (Meta)Physics of the Searle Argument [1 msgs] AI: Searle and Penrose [1 msgs] DIET: _Catalog of Nutrients_ description [1 msgs] DIET: _Nutrients Catalog_ Table of Contents [1 msgs] HEALTH: Hydergine? [2 msgs] Nightly Market Report [1 msgs] Peirce, Korzybski, Rand [1 msgs] Perseid meteor shower [2 msgs] SEARLE: Axioms vs. Tautologies [1 msgs] Worry: evolution and violence [2 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 55658 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 15:51:14 -0500 From: extr@jido.b30.ingr.com (Craig Presson) Subject: HEALTH: Hydergine? In <9308031931.AA00539@klingon.East.Sun.COM>, Elias Israel - SunSelect Engineering writes: [...] |> Naturally, I've read what Durk and Sandy have to say about it, and I |> also have another book that I found that mentions it which basically |> repeats the same information that D&S provide and cites the same studies, |> pretty much. This second book (I have the book at home, I can provide |> the title for anyone interested) is somewhat more recent that Life Extension, |> but it dates back to 1989; not exactly yesterday. Ward Dean, MD and John Morgenthaler (Morning-dollar??) _Smart Drugs and Nutrients_ (Health Freedom Publications, Menlo Park, Ca.,1990) is _the_ book on smart drugs. "Smart II: The Sequel" is coming soon. They have several pages on Hydergine including about a page of references, some to referreed journals, some not. |> What I'd like to know: Does anyone here know of more recent information, I haven't tried it yet. I'm still in the sandbox with OTC stuff. ^ / ------/---- extropy@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) /AS 5/20/373 PNO /ExI 4/373 PNO ** E' and E-choice spoken here ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 16:05:42 -0500 From: extr@jido.b30.ingr.com (Craig Presson) Subject: Perseid meteor shower In <9308032000.AA01635@cleo.MasPar.Com>, Jay R. Freeman writes: [...] |> Unfortunately, August 10 is last-quarter moon. On the eleventh, moonrise |> will be some time roughly in the middle of the night -- I'd have to go |> home to look up the exact time. Moon in the sky tends to wash out all |> normal celestial phenomena except the sun, ... It's not _that_ bad, Jay. You speak from the frustration of wanting to observe deep-sky objects when the moon is bright, it sounds like. However, a first-rate meteor shower includes a lot of nice bright stuff that stands right out. If the angular distance between the moon and the centroid of the Perseids allows, you just avoid looking at the moon so your eyes don't loose their dark adaptation. If you're trying to do serious meteor tracking, you will have the loss of a few faint sightings to mourn. If you're just out to Goo and Gahh over them, though, only the bright ones matter ;-) ^ / ------/---- extropy@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman "The Other" Craig Presson) /AS 5/20/373 PNO /ExI 4/373 PNO ** E' and E-choice spoken here ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 14:46:26 -0700 From: freeman@maspar.com (Jay R. Freeman) Subject: Perseid meteor shower Aha, a chance to confuse everybody: Freeman (me) writes: |> Moon in the sky tends to wash out all |> normal celestial phenomena except the sun, ... Freeman (him) replies: > It's not _that_ bad, Jay. You speak from the frustration of wanting to > observe deep-sky objects when the moon is bright, it sounds like. To which Freeman (me) counters: Yes. For those not in the know, "deep-sky" means "beyond Pluto", and includes star-clusters, galaxies, nebulae and (modulo a long technical discussion) double-stars. Except in Los Angeles, where it also includes the sun. :-) Serious deep-sky observers distinguish at least two categories of faintness beyond "I can't see a thing." The first is "faint fuzzy nothings", and the second is "lumpy darkness". Observing these objects takes years of practice -- imagination improves but slowly with time, particularly in the face of razzing from your fellow amateur astronomers who are less gifted with it than you. Advanced deep-sky observers often warm up by spotting ghosts, wraiths and miscellaneous spooks; good ones can do so with their eyes shut. Notwithstanding, in my experience a quarter moon in the sky is good for perhaps one stellar magnitude of naked-eye limiting magnitude, on stars. And of course, I want to see *all* the meteors. -- Jay "I saw the Sculptor dwarf galaxy" Freeman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 15:40:03 +0100 From: Arkuat Subject: SEARLE: Axioms vs. Tautologies I can't stand it anymore. Rand's rants to the contrary, "Existence exists" is not and cannot be an axiom. It is a tautology, a statement with null information content. When Euclid wrote the Elements, he did not include among his axioms such statements as "a point is a point", "lines are linear", or "a horse is a horse, of course, of course". So please knock it off. If you want to discuss the falsifiability or nonfalsifiability of axioms, please leave tautologies out of the discussion. Then *maybe* you'll get some interesting results. But tautologies are not falsifiable. (Hell, "Tautologies are not falsifiable" is practically a tautology.) Eric Watt Forste PGP: 0x431347 HEx: ARKU ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 19:11:32 -0500 From: "Phil G. Fraering" Subject: AI: Searle and Penrose Hal Finney talked about how Penrose in TENM wrote that he believed that quantum gravity or some other such mechanism was neccesary for conciousness. He also said that Penrose didn't say whether he thought that such mechanisms could be designed into a machine. Penrose, in the later chapters, seemed to me to be saying that he believed that they could. pgf ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 21:54:32 -0400 From: Tim Freeman Subject: HEALTH: Hydergine? From: eisrael@suneast.east.sun.com (Elias Israel - SunSelect Engineering) >What I'd like to know: Does anyone here know of more recent information, >studies in peer-reviewed journals, anything of note? Here are some pointers to papers I've collected over the years. IMO Durk and Sandy's accuracy leaves much to be desired; I recommend throwing away their text and using their bibliography, and making some efforts to find dissenting articles on your own. The Rouy89 study below had positive results. >Who on the list is currently taking this drug and would be willing to >share some anecdotes, information, impressions, etc? Not me. Second priority for me is to attempt calorie restriction; first is to finish my thesis. Tim @article ( THOMSON90, key = "Thomson90" , author = "Troy L. Thompson and Christopher M. Filley and Wayne D. Mitchell and Kathleen M. Culig and Mary LoVerde and Richard Byyny" , title = "Lack of Efficacy of Hydergine in Patients with Alzheimer's Disease" , journal = "New England Journal of Medicine" , volume = "323" , number = "7" , month = "August" , year = "1990" , pages = "445--8" , keywords= "hydergine, tsf" , annote = "Tim has a copy." , bibdate = "Sat Sep 15 23:00:44 1990" , ) @article ( ROUY89, key = "Rouy89" , author = "J. M. Rouy and A. M. Douillon and B. Compan and Y. Wolmark" , title = "Ergoloid Mesylates (`Hydergine') in the Treatment of Mental Deterioration in the Elderly: a 6-month Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial" , journal = "Current Medical Research and Opinion" , volume = "11" , number = "6" , year = "1989" , pages = "380--389" , keywords= "hydergine, longevity, tsf" , annote = "Tim has a copy missing pp 386--7." , bibdate = "Mon Aug 20 17:24:19 1990" , ) @article ( AMENTA89, key = "Amenta89" , author = "F. Amenta and C. Cavallotti and F. Franch and A. Ricci" , title = "Muscarinic Cholinergic Receptors in the Hippocampus of the Aged Rat: Effects of Long-Term Hydergine Administration" , journal = "Arch. int. Pharmacodyn." , volume = "297" , year = "1989" , pages = "225--234" , keywords= "hydergine,longevity,tsf" , annote = "Tim has a copy." , bibdate = "Mon Aug 20 17:26:30 1990" , ) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Aug 93 00:10:05 EDT From: The Hawthorne Exchange Subject: Nightly Market Report The Hawthorne Exchange - HEx Nightly Market Report For more information on HEx, send email to HEx@sea.east.sun.com with the Subject info. --------------------------------------------------------------- News Summary as of: Wed Aug 4 00:10:04 EDT 1993 Newly Registered Reputations: (None) New Share Issues: (None) Share Splits: (None) --------------------------------------------------------------- Market Summary as of: Wed Aug 4 00:00:03 EDT 1993 Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding Market Value 1000 .10 .20 .10 10000 2000 200.00 110 .01 .10 - 10000 - - 150 .01 .10 - 10000 - - 1E6 .02 .10 - 10000 - - 1E9 .01 .10 - 10000 - - 200 .10 .20 .10 10000 2000 200.00 80 .01 .10 - 10000 - - 90 .01 .20 .10 10000 2000 200.00 ACS - .15 .50 10000 1124 562.00 AI .01 .50 .20 10000 1000 200.00 ALCOR 2.00 3.80 2.00 10000 3031 6062.00 ALTINST - .15 .15 10000 2500 375.00 ANTON - 1.00 - 10000 - - ARKU - - - - - - BIOPR .01 .20 .10 10000 1500 150.00 BLAIR .01 30.00 50.00 10000 25 1250.00 CYPHP .15 .17 .17 10000 100 17.00 DEREK - .42 1.00 100000 8220 8220.00 DRXLR 1.00 2.00 2.00 10000 2246 4492.00 DVDT .75 1.55 1.63 10000 9900 16137.00 E .58 .70 .60 10000 5487 3292.20 ESR - - - - - - EXI 1.00 3.00 1.30 10000 3025 3932.50 FAB - - - - - - FCP - 1.00 - 80000 4320 - GHG .01 .30 .01 10000 6755 67.55 GOBEL .01 .30 1.00 10000 767 767.00 GOD .10 .20 .10 10000 1000 100.00 H .76 .76 - 30000 18750 - HAM .01 .30 .20 10000 5000 1000.00 HEINLN .01 .25 - 10000 - - HEX 100.00 125.00 100.00 10000 3368 336800.00 HFINN 2.00 10.00 .75 10000 1005 753.75 IMMFR .25 .80 .49 10000 1401 686.49 JFREE .01 .15 .10 10000 3000 300.00 JPP .25 .26 .25 10000 2510 627.50 LEARY .01 .20 .20 10000 100 20.00 LEF .01 .15 .30 10000 1526 457.80 LEFTY .01 .45 .30 10000 3051 915.30 LIST .40 .75 .50 10000 5000 2500.00 LP .01 .09 - 10000 - - LSOFT .58 .60 .58 10000 7050 4089.00 LURKR - .08 - 100000 - - MARCR - - - - - - MED21 .01 .08 - 10000 - - MLINK - .09 .02 1000000 2602 52.04 MMORE - .10 - 10000 - - MORE .75 1.25 .75 10000 3000 2250.00 MWM .15 .15 1.50 10000 1260 1890.00 N 20.00 25.00 25.00 10000 98 2450.00 NEWTON - .20 - 10000 - - NSS .01 .05 - 10000 - - OCEAN .11 .12 .10 10000 1500 150.00 P 20.00 25.00 25.00 1000000 66 1650.00 PETER - .01 1.00 10000000 600 600.00 PLANET .01 .10 .05 10000 1500 75.00 PPL .11 .25 .10 10000 400 40.00 PRICE - 4.00 2.00 10000000 1410 2820.00 R .49 2.80 .99 10000 5100 5049.00 RAND - .06 - 10000 - - RJC 1.00 999.00 .60 10000 5100 3060.00 ROMA - - - - - - RWHIT - - - - - - SGP - - - - - - SHAWN .01 1.00 - 10000 - - SSI - .05 - 10000 - - TCMAY .40 .63 .75 10000 4000 3000.00 TIM 1.00 2.00 1.00 10000 100 100.00 TRANS .01 .05 .40 10000 1511 604.40 VINGE .20 .50 .20 10000 1000 200.00 WILKEN 1.00 10.00 10.00 10000 101 1010.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 419374.53 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 21:27:07 GMT From: price@price.demon.co.uk (Michael Clive Price) Subject: (Meta)Physics of the Searle Argument Like Freeman Craig Presson I find in the current debate on mind and metaphysics confirms my decision not to study philosophy. In all seriousness I advise Tim Starr to read _Never at Rest, a biography of Isaac Newton_ by Richard Westfall, Cambridge ISBN 0-521-27435-4. Tim's fighting battles that were fought (and lost) 300 years ago when the Cartesians rolled over and died under the onslaught of the Newton paradigm. Tim: > How can anything that has weight not have volume? Newton was plagued with similar silly questions ("Sir Isaac, how can one body attract another across empty space?") by the Cartesians of his day. They never understood that science is descriptive. Hence Newton's public aphorism "Hypotheses non fingo" (I do not frame hypotheses). In an effort to cut through all the Cartesian ballyhoo Newton wrote (in the 2nd paragraph, book 2 (system of the world),_Principia_, translated page 464 NAR): "But our purpose is only to trace out the quantity and properties of this force [universal attraction at a distance] from the phenomena, and to apply what we discover in some simple cases as principles, by which, in a mathematical way, we may estimate the effects thereof in more involved cases ... We said, _in a mathematical way_ [Newton's emphasis], to avoid all questions about the nature or quality of this force, which we would not be understood to determine any hypothesis" Westfall goes on to say: "He [Newton] could have saved his breath. Fifty such disclaimers - or fifty times fifty - would not have stifled the outrage of the mechanical [Cartesian] philosophers" It was precisely questions of the form that Tim is asking now, that were asked by the Cartesians Newton's time, that impeded scientific inquiry so much. The scientific revolution only took off when people stopped asking how and why things happened in a non-constructive fashion but, instead, actually started asking what _actually_ happened. In this case the answer is to stop asking how can point particles exist, but instead start _measuring_ the radius. So far no one has detected a measurable radius for any fundamental particle (and that includes fermions). Tim: > As for the ability of classical mechanics to explain what relativity > can, Beckmann seems to disagree somewhat. Craig: > Well, we need the references on that. Anyone who can help please do. > All I can do about it is look Beckmann up in the library or read the > American Spectator [MAGNA CUM GRANO SALIS][2] article. Someone sent me 4 issues of Petr Beckmann's journal _Galilean_Electrodynamics_ a year or so ago, asking for comments. I selected the best 5 or 6 articles (ie those not obviously flawed and looked most "scientific") and worked through them. Either they contained internal errors or else they misrepresented or misunderstood what Einsteinian relativity is all about (the strawman approach). Definitely tilting at windmills. Classical mechanics and Maxwell's electromagnetism field theory are quite compatible with Einsteinian relativity (indeed Maxwell's equations combined with the requirement of Galilean relativity _yields_ special relativity - which is not to minimise Einstein's contribution). Mike Price price@price.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 00:21:39 -0700 From: dasher@netcom.com (D. Anton Sherwood) Subject: Worry: evolution and violence Related to uploading is the idea of enhancing the existing body. If you have ever enjoyed superhero comic books, I imagine you have a favorite superpower, something that you would build into the new improved you as soon as you can. I want to improve my durability, agility, senses and speed, in roughly that order. (This connects to something Stanton said in the sexuality thread, but I started this before that thread began, in response to Robin's "What should we worry about?".) Assuming that humanity however transformed will not soon be entirely free of those who would coerce, I see "arms races". Can a choice of technology paths nudge the arms races in such a way as to make violence less likely rather than more likely? If we armor ourselves, the offense concentrates on firepower, with much collateral damage likely. If instead we seek longevity by redundancy (backups), the effectiveness of lethal force is limited, and so the offensive side of the arms race goes into crypto-cracking and the like -- scary, but at least it won't pepper the neighborhood with holes. What happens if we go for the ideal of a parallel, fault-tolerant, distributed Bush Robot (or T2 shape-shifter)? What will your enemies do if your "body" is only a robot (rented?) controlled by cellular modem, and you're hidden in distributed form in the Nets? I hope there is a way to encourage everyone to abandon violence as useless. Anton Sherwood dasher@netcom.com +1 415 267 0685 1800 Market St #207, San Francisco 94102 USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 00:22:56 -0700 From: dasher@netcom.com (D. Anton Sherwood) Subject: Peirce, Korzybski, Rand I relayed ESR's remarks about where Rand went wrong ("Metaphysics vs. Epistemology, Noumena vs. Phenomena", April 30) to APA-L, and got this response from Lee Gold. My own knowledge of the history of philosophy peters out at about the same time Rand's does. All I know about Korzybski I learned from [A.E.] Van Vogt. (I once tried reading one of Korzybski's books (in translation) but found it too difficult.) <> I've seen so many people with philosophies that didn't match their behavior that my guess is that if Rand hadn't turned into an "autocratic, cast-iron bitch," she would probably have turned into some other sort of bitch. I do wonder how much "autocratic, cast-iron bitch" differs from "high charismatic woman whose philosophy I don't like." <> So far, I haven't heard of any _Korzybski_ empiricists able "to communicate to the rest of the world well enough to lead a true movement for freedom," at least not a movement that seems likely to succeed. Nor have I heard of any Korzybski-oriented groups for keeping people from turning to (or leading them off of) amphetamines or other addictive behaviors. If this would work, it would be a good way to make money which could then be ploughed into funding "a true movement for freedom" or some other useful activity. In another context, Lee says something more interesting: Judaism teaches that the universe was created imperfect and that God cannot perfect it directly; only human beings can perfect it. <> I occasionally meditate on how the universe has always seemed to almost make sense at any given level of knowledge of physics, chemistry, etc. Every culture's oversimplified understanding of the hard sciences works well enough for all practical purposes with only a few niggling discrepancies indicating that the complex truth is not yet known. Has anyone ever tried computer modeling to see how likely this is to be the result of a few, deeply buried fundamental laws (that we still haven't figured out)? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 09:28:20 BST From: jrk@information-systems.east-anglia.ac.uk (Richard Kennaway) Subject: Worry: evolution and violence Anton Sherwood writes: >Related to uploading is the idea of enhancing the existing body. If you >have ever enjoyed superhero comic books, I imagine you have a favorite >superpower, something that you would build into the new improved you as soon >as you can. I want to improve my durability, agility, senses and speed, in >roughly that order. I want intelligence, wisdom, enlightenment (by which I mean three different names for the same thing). And to have whatever physical capacity is necessary to get them. >Assuming that humanity however transformed will not soon be entirely free of >those who would coerce, A safe assumption, IMHO. I would replace "soon" by "ever", or perhaps "within less than geological periods of time". > I see "arms races". Can a choice of technology >paths nudge the arms races in such a way as to make violence less likely >rather than more likely? I don't believe so. The technology only affects the forms of violence. Remember "the war to end war"? >If we armor ourselves, the offense concentrates on firepower, with much >collateral damage likely. If instead we seek longevity by redundancy >(backups), the effectiveness of lethal force is limited, and so the >offensive side of the arms race goes into crypto-cracking and the like -- >scary, but at least it won't pepper the neighborhood with holes. A disgracefully fleshist remark! :-) I'd rather take a survivable bullet wound than have my uploaded personality eaten away by electronic Alzheimer's. >I hope there is a way to encourage everyone to abandon violence as useless. Violence -- or more generally, coercion -- will never be useless, only the effective forms will change. I can't see a reason to prefer software violence to bullet-holes. -- ____ Richard Kennaway __\_ / School of Information Systems Internet: jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk \ X/ University of East Anglia uucp: ...mcsun!ukc!uea-sys!jrk \/ Norwich NR4 7TJ, U.K. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 8:46:01 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: Natural Law and Senator Joseph Biden Craig Presson indicated hostility to Biden's treatment of natural law in the confirmation hearings of Justice Clarence Thomas. Interestingly enough, I just got back from a talk by Randy Barnett at Laissez-Faire on "The Presumption of Liberty," about his theory of the 9th amendment to the US Constitution, in which he praised Biden quite a bit for his support of natural law and amendment IX. (Barnett is a libertarian law professor, editor of "Assessing the Criminal," and vol. I and II of "The Rights Retained by the People," the latter two concerning the 9th.) Apparently Biden learned enough from his briefing for the Bork hearing about natural law that he believes in it. He just doesn't include property rights. He questioned both Bork and every nominee since about the 9th amendment, and questioned the natural law Justice Thomas had used, ius divine. So, Biden doesn't need to be beaten over the head with natural law, he needs to learn that property rights are part of it. He does believe that natural law/rights sans property rights as he believes in the concept is what most American people also believe in. Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 8:58:34 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: Aquinas Opposed Religious Persecution? Since George Smith mentions that Aquinas advocated the death penalty for heretics, I'd like to know how James Donald can support his claim that\ Aquinas was a great opponent of religious persecution. Did he oppose in on grounds of natural law, but support it on grounds of divine law? He did believe in such a dichotomy, and this represented a step forward in the acceptance of natural law in that divine law had stood alone for quite a while, so he may still qualify, but... Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 9:34:39 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: On Searle and Craig I'm tired of the call-and-response style of this debate, so I'm going to minimize my replies to Craig and preface them with a few general conclusions. Mankind seems to tend to think of the universe in terms of metaphor to the most advanced form of man-made thing, at least in the West. During the Enlightenment, the metaphor for existence was the clock. During the Infotech Revolution we are experiencing now, the metaphor is the computer. After a more advanced artifact is invented, I expect it to become the metaphor for existence. However, I have no reason to believe that there is any metaphysical reason to believe that any of these metaphors have any literal truth to them. The issue of the reducability of mind to machine is a metaphysical one. Since most contemporary science presumes materialism in metaphysics, the scientific case for this reduction is well-developed, and may even be true. However, the justification of this presumption seems impoverished. It seems to be based upon the ground that the only alternative is Cartesian dualism, which is worse, so it must be true. I suspect that this dichotomy may be as false as that between liberal and conservative in contemporary parlance. However, I'll have to research this more, as I plan to. My opponents seem to have great difficulty telling the difference between an argument and a question. Hence, they have tended to be argumentative and uninformative. It's silly of them to do this, to position themselves in opposition to me on this issue, since I have no position of my own to oppose. I'm trying to figure out which one to take. This failure to distinguish between inquiry and argument is intolerant in its effect, even though this may be unintended. Tolerance is a virtue; intolerance a vice. I must conclude that Craig has failed to read where I have made clear some of the things he asks me for, such as an example of a metaphysical axiom which is testable: existence exists. As for Petyr Beckmann's theories, the sources are in the library. the book is "Einstein Plus Two." I haven't read it, as I suspect it's beyond my grasp of physics. Craig attempted a speculative circumstantial ad hominem based upon the fact of an article having appeared in the American Spectator. I don't see how creationists can benefit from this article in the slightest. It seems to be written with a view towards placing Beckmann in the context of the history of physics, no more. I should also point out that this magazine calls itself libertarian, as opposed to being affiliated with traditionalist conservatives like creationists. >|> I wasn't asking what we treat them as, I was asking what they are. I >|> realize that this form of statement is unpopular with many on this list, but >|> that's what I want to know. > >It's not merely "unpopular", it's also nonsensical. You're still looking for >Platonic essences; so, you're in the wrong cave. Here Craig steps on my turf: concept theory. Craig, since you admit to "unreconstructed positivism," I suspect I can run circles around you in concept theory like you can around me in physics. Suffice to say that not all essences are Platonic, that Platonic conceptual theory is a form of "realism," spefically "radical realism," and that I can tell you the difference between this, moderate realism, and both radical and moderate nominalism, as well as the theory I find best. >[pure bilateral bickering deleted] >|> Very well: The content of the genetic code isn't explained by the known >|> laws associated with that system, therefore they are incomplete. > >What part of genetics are you not satisfied with? For one thing, this claim that homosexuality is genetic. As I understand it, it is based upon correlation alone. No "mechanism." >I'd be fascinated to know where your vital >essence has room to hide between the codons. Craig adds a new strawman to his repertoire. Now I'm not only making an argument instead of asking questions, I'm arguing for vitalism. Clearly this is easier than bearing any burden of proof, but it is uninformative. Since informativeness seems to be Craig's main standard for evaluation these things, this means that he doesn't measure up to it very well. >|> BTW, aesthetics is one of those other branches of philosophy. Since you >|> called it an "aesthetic" issue whether to view life as organism or machine, >|> Ray, care to explain the theory of aesthetics underlying this claim? > >Occam already did this. The theory with the fewest assumptions wins. I have zero assumptions. I win. >|> >To say existence _exists_ is to invoke recursion. >|> >|> So what? > ^^^^^^^ >what he _meant_ was >a circular definition. Actually, existence is defined ostensively, not circularly. Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 10:26:04 GMT From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu Subject: A Farewell to Searle for Now >At the present moment even an open minded person would have to say that >Beckman has not proven his own theory to be superior to special or >general relativity. > >Sean J. Merritt Let me take this opportunity to make it clear that I wasn't presenting Beckmann's theory as proven at all, merely mentioning it because I was reminded of what I'd recently read of it in the interest of any reader's curiosity. Ray's done an admirable job of trying to answer my questions. I seem to have run out of them. Perhaps I'll decide on this issue soon, perhaps not. He asks for a test of a metaphysical axiom. It's the same for the test of any axiom: try to deny it without presuming it. If you can, it's not an axiom. If you can't, then it is. >> You're getting a bit too pedantic, Ray. Starting to seem condescending. > > Sorry, but it seems you were being purposely misleading sometimes. Bringing >Beckmann into the picture is even worse. Stick with Searle. Don't really need to apologize. I only mentioned it in case you cared to know. However, I have never intended to mislead, only to understand. If it'll make a difference, I accept your kind apology. >> BTW, aesthetics is one of those other branches of philosophy. Since you >> called it an "aesthetic" issue whether to view life as organism or machine, >> Ray, care to explain the theory of aesthetics underlying this claim? > > Occam's razor. That's logic, not aesthetics. I have some suspicions about the difference between measuring the properties of a thing and observing the thing itself, but I can't articulate them yet, so I'll hold off on it until I can do so confidently. Thanks very much, I've learned a lot from this inquiry! Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! Assistant Editor: Freedom Network News, the newsletter of ISIL, The International Society for Individual Liberty, 1800 Market St., San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 864-0952; FAX: (415) 864-7506; 71034.2711@compuserve.com Think Universally, Act Selfishly - starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 09:45:30 EST From: Harvey Newstrom Subject: DIET: _Catalog of Nutrients_ description Due to my name being posted to this list, and some private inquiries, I am unabashedly posting information about my new reference book. It is called _Nutrients Catalog_ by Harvey Newstrom, and is published by McFarland & Company, Inc. It's number is 0-89950-784-0. This is an exhaustive reference book (over 500 pages) for looking up information only. It is not a pep-talk, nor is it a how-to book. The blurb from the publisher follows: _NUTRIENTS CATALOG_ Vitamins, Minerals, Amino Acids, Macronutrients-- Beneficial Use, Helpers, Inhibitors, Food Sources, Intake Recommendations and Symptoms of Over and Under Use Harvey Newstrom. [576]pp. 92-56671 Appendices, bibliography, index. 0-89950-784-0 $45 library binding 1993 There are over two dozen vitamins, three dozen minerals, one dozen amino- acids, and a half-dozen macronutrients that are essential to the human diet. If any of these nutrients are missing, a specific set of chemical reactions in the body are disrupted. Complete descriptions of these essential elements are presented in this reference book. Each entry lists the various names by which the nutrient is known, the common classifications (water soluble vitamin, hormone precursor, etc.), the chemical forms, symptoms associated with a dietary deficiency, side-effects from an excessive amount of the compound, toxicity, inhibitors, helpers or co-factors, food sources, possible applications, recommended daily dosage, and warnings of specific problems associated with the nutrient. Harvey Newstrom, a computer network engineer from West Melbourne, Florida, spent nearly ten years researching this book. McFarland & Company, Inc. Box 611 Jefferson, NC 28640 Tel. (919-246-4460) __ Harvey Newstrom (hnewstrom@hnewstrom.ess.harris.com) Voice: (407)727-5176 Harris Corp., Box 37, MS 15-8874, Melbourne, FL 32902 FAX: (407)727-6611 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 09:53:56 EST From: Harvey Newstrom Subject: DIET: _Nutrients Catalog_ Table of Contents Due to my name being posted to this list, and some private inquiries, I am unabashedly posting information about my new reference book. It is called _Nutrients Catalog_ by Harvey Newstrom, and is published by McFarland & Company, Inc. It's number is 0-89950-784-0. This is an exhaustive reference book (over 500 pages) for looking up information only. It is not a pep-talk, nor is it a how-to book. The Table of Contents from the book follows: _NUTRIENTS CATALOG_ Table of Contents Preface xiii How to Use This Book xv I: VITAMINS VITAMIN A COMPLEX 1 PROVITAMIN A 1 VITAMIN A 6 VITAMIN A1 10 VITAMIN A2 10 VITAMIN A ACETATE 10 VITAMIN A ACID 10 VITAMIN A ALDEHYDE 10 VITAMIN A EPOXIDE 10 VITAMIN A PALMITATE 10 MONOEPOXYVITAMIN A 10 NEOVITAMIN A 10 VITAMIN B COMPLEX 10 VITAMIN B 11 VITAMIN B1 11 VITAMIN B1 O,S-DIACETATE 23 VITAMIN B1 DISULFIDE 23 VITAMIN B1 HYDROCHLORIDE 23 VITAMIN B1 MONONITRATE 23 VITAMIN B1 PHOSPHORIC ACID ESTER CHLORIDE 23 VITAMIN B1 PHOSPHORIC ACID ESTER SALT 23 VITAMIN B1 PROPYL DISULFIDE 23 VITAMIN B1 1,5-SALT 24 VITAMIN B1 TRIPHOSPHORIC ACID ESTER 24 VITAMIN B1 TRIPHOSPHORIC ACID SALT 24 VITAMIN B2 24 VITAMIN B2 COMPLEX 24 VITAMIN B2 PHOSPHATE 36 VITAMIN B3 COMPLEX 37 VITAMIN B3a 37 VITAMIN B3b 43 VITAMIN B4 49 VITAMIN B5 49 VITAMIN B5 CALCIUM SALT 58 VITAMIN B5 SODIUM SALT 58 VITAMIN B6 58 VITAMIN B7 67 VITAMIN B8 67 VITAMIN B9 68 VITAMIN B10 68 VITAMIN B11 68 VITAMIN B12 68 VITAMIN B12-60Co 74 VITAMIN B12-57Co 74 VITAMIN B12a 75 VITAMIN B12b 75 VITAMIN B12c 75 VITAMIN B12f 75 VITAMIN B12m 75 VITAMIN B12p 75 VITAMIN B12r 75 VITAMIN B12s 75 VITAMIN B12-ZINC TANNATE COMPLEX 75 VITAMIN B12III 75 psi-VITAMIN B12 75 psi-VITAMIN B12d 75 VITAMIN B12 COENZYME 75 VITAMIN B13 76 VITAMIN B14 76 VITAMIN B15 76 VITAMIN B15H8 77 VITAMIN B16 77 VITAMIN B17 77 SUB-VITAMIN B COMPLEX 78 VITAMIN BC 79 VITAMIN BH 85 VITAMIN BH MONOPHOSPHATE 86 VITAMIN BH NIACINATE 86 VITAMIN BP 86 VITAMIN BP BROMIDE HEXAMETHYLENEDICARBAMATE 87 CDP-VITAMIN BP 87 VITAMIN BP CHLORIDE 87 VITAMIN BP CHLORIDE CARBAMATE 87 VITAMIN BP CHLORIDE DIHYDROGEN PHOSPHATE 87 VITAMIN BP CHLORIDE SUCCINATE 87 VITAMIN BP DEHYDROCHOLATE 87 VITAMIN BP DICHLORIDE 87 VITAMIN BP DIHYDROGEN CITRATE 87 VITAMIN BP ESTERASE 88 VITAMIN BP OROTATE 88 VITAMIN BP SALICYLATE 88 VITAMIN BP THEOPHYLLINATE 88 PROVITAMIN BT 88 VITAMIN BT 88 VITAMIN BW 89 VITAMIN BW SULFOXIDE 89 VITAMIN BX 90 VITAMIN C COMPLEX 90 ANTIVITAMIN C 90 VITAMIN C 91 VITAMIN C CALCIUM SALT 97 VITAMIN C MAGNESIUM SALT 97 VITAMIN C NICOTINAMIDE COMPLEX 97 VITAMIN C PALMITATE 97 VITAMIN C POTASSIUM SALT 97 VITAMIN C SODIUM SALT 97 VITAMIN C2 97 VITAMIN C3 98 VITAMIN D COMPLEX 98 VITAMIN D1 99 VITAMIN D2 99 VITAMIN D3 99 VITAMIN D4 99 VITAMIN D5 100 VITAMIN DC 100 VITAMIN DM 100 VITAMIN E COMPLEX 100 ALPHA-VITAMIN E 102 ALPHA-VITAMIN E ACETATE 102 ALPHA-VITAMIN E ACID SUCCINATE 102 BETA-VITAMIN E 102 GAMMA-VITAMIN E 102 DELTA-VITAMIN E 102 EPSILON-VITAMIN E 102 ZETA1-VITAMIN E 102 ZETA2-VITAMIN E 102 ETA-VITAMIN E 102 VITAMIN E2(50) 102 VITAMIN F COMPLEX 103 PROVITAMIN F 103 VITAMIN F 104 VITAMIN F99 105 VITAMIN H COMPLEX 105 VITAMIN H1 105 VITAMIN H3 105 VITAMIN I 106 VITAMIN J 107 VITAMIN K COMPLEX 107 VITAMIN K1 108 VITAMIN K1 OXIDE 108 VITAMIN K1(20) 108 VITAMIN K2 108 VITAMIN K2(0) 108 VITAMIN K2(5) 108 VITAMIN K2(10) 108 VITAMIN K2(15) 108 VITAMIN K2(20) 108 VITAMIN K2(25) 108 VITAMIN K2(30) 108 VITAMIN K2(35) 108 VITAMIN K2(40) 109 VITAMIN K2(45) 109 VITAMIN K2(45)H 109 VITAMIN K2(50) 109 VITAMIN K2(55) 109 VITAMIN K2(60) 109 VITAMIN K2(65) 109 VITAMIN K3 109 VITAMIN K3H2 109 VITAMIN K4 109 VITAMIN K5 109 VITAMIN K6 109 VITAMIN K7 109 VITAMIN K8 109 VITAMIN K9 109 VITAMIN K9(H) 109 VITAMIN K-S(II) 110 VITAMIN L COMPLEX 110 VITAMIN L1 110 VITAMIN L2 110 VITAMIN Mi* 110 VITAMIN MK COMPLEX 111 VITAMIN MK1 111 VITAMIN MK2 111 VITAMIN MK3 111 VITAMIN MK4 111 VITAMIN MK5 111 VITAMIN MK6 111 VITAMIN MK7 111 VITAMIN MK8 111 VITAMIN MK9 111 VITAMIN MK10 111 VITAMIN N 112 VITAMIN OHB12 112 VITAMIN P COMPLEX 113 VITAMIN P1 113 VITAMIN P1 COMPLEX 113 VITAMIN P2 113 VITAMIN P3 113 VITAMIN P4 113 VITAMIN Q COMPLEX 114 VITAMIN Q 114 VITAMIN Q0 114 VITAMIN Q1 114 VITAMIN Q2 114 VITAMIN Q3 114 VITAMIN Q4 115 VITAMIN Q5 115 VITAMIN Q6 115 VITAMIN Q7 115 VITAMIN Q8 116 VITAMIN Q9 116 VITAMIN Q10 116 VITAMIN T COMPLEX 118 VITAMIN U 118 VITAMIN U BROMIDE 119 VITAMIN U CHLORIDE 119 VITAMIN U CHICK FACTOR 119 VITAMIN V 119 VITAMIN W 120 VITAMIN X 120 VITAMIN Y 121 II: MINERALS ALUMINUM 123 ANTIMONY 123 ARSENIC 124 BARIUM 124 BERYLLIUM 125 BORON 125 BROMINE 126 CADMIUM 126 CALCIUM 126 CESIUM 138 CHLORINE 139 TRIVALENT CHROMIUM 139 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 140 COBALT 140 COPPER 141 FLUORINE 151 GERMANIUM 151 GOLD 152 IODINE 152 IODINE 131 153 IRON 153 LEAD 167 LITHIUM 167 MAGNESIUM 168 MANGANESE 177 MERCURY 186 MOLYBDENUM 186 NICKEL 187 PHOSPHORUS 187 POTASSIUM 199 RUBIDIUM 211 SELENIUM 212 SILICON 212 SILVER 213 SODIUM 214 STRONTIUM 225 STRONTIUM 90 225 SULFUR 226 TIN 226 TITANIUM 226 TUNGSTEN 227 VANADIUM 227 ZINC 228 III: AMINO ACIDS (Protein Complex) ALANINE 239 ARGININE 239 ASPARAGINE 248 ASPARTIC ACID 249 CYSTEINE 249 CYSTINE 257 GLUTAMATE 258 GLUTAMINE 258 GLYCINE 258 HISTIDINE 259 HYDROXYPROLINE 267 ISOLEUCINE 268 LEUCINE 276 LYSINE 285 METHIONINE 294 ORNITHINE 303 PHENYLALANINE 303 PROLINE 312 SERINE 312 TAURINE 313 THREONINE 313 TRYPTOPHAN 322 TYROSINE 331 VALINE 339 IV: MACRONUTRIENTS CARBOHYDRATE 349 ENERGY 258 FATS 371 FIBER 384 PROTEIN COMPLEX 385 WATER 397 VII: APPENDEXES A: Indications for Use 441 B: Vitamin B Complex Designations 455 C: Nutrient Ratios 457 D: Nutrient Dosages 459 E: Nutrient Unit Conversions 465 Bibliography 467 Index 479 __ Harvey Newstrom (hnewstrom@hnewstrom.ess.harris.com) Voice: (407)727-5176 Harris Corp., Box 37, MS 15-8874, Melbourne, FL 32902 FAX: (407)727-6611 ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #215 ********************************* &