Log in

No account? Create an account
Napkin Philosophy [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Napkin Philosophy

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Proposal: "Philosophical Politics" - Philosophers being democratic kings [Dec. 3rd, 2005|06:08 pm]
Napkin Philosophy
[Tags|, ]

We talked about Plato's Republic in intro to philosophy. I listened to the basic ideas and all, but what I mostly did was think. I do that sometimes.

The debate in the class was, basically, what's better? Democracy or Plato's rule by philosophers?

I thought... why not both?

Let's say we take our current system (or, better yet, a European system, but the differences are unimportant) and then introduce some standards. Specifically, some degree requirements for the positions.

How about we say all civil servants have to have at least a masters in something. Then, candidates must have a phd - with a thesis in an idea on how to make the government better.

So, when we vote for candidates, we'll be voting from a pool of phds.

It'll be sweet. Just think. Civil servants/interns can get their masters and then work on their phd while they're interning for an existing candidate - much like how it works today (but with the degree requirements added in, of course).

Once someone is elected into office, their decisions must be logically proven and then reviewed by a board of "senior" phds, which will also be elected from the phd pool.

The legislature could debate over the validity or soundness of arguments instead of pork barrels, interests, or any other bullshit.

Maybe some will think this would be terribly inefficient. I don't see a problem, though. Testing the validity of an argument is a rather quick process for a philosopher (especially if it's in symbolic notation!) and the time that would be saved over bullshitting would be well worth it.

I'm still working on this model, though... comments? Don't hold back.
link2 comments|post comment

SQO: A better explanation of our model [Dec. 2nd, 2005|02:25 pm]
Napkin Philosophy
[Tags|, ]

For those who are not actually involved in the database research project, I have decided to put a small outline of some background concepts in database optimization in addition to our model thereof. Read more...Collapse )
linkpost comment

The Chip: The issue of intrusion [Dec. 2nd, 2005|02:34 am]
Napkin Philosophy

Since this has been brought to my attention, I would like to make a post to discuss the issue of intrusion.

Who wants an operation to put something near their spinal cord? or their optic nerve? the operation for the cpu seems like the least of our worries, given that it's not in such a deep location in the brian as these other components. If it's not, though, then it must communicate with them through the brain - and if communication is wireless, that raises some radiation concerns.

Regardless, the issue I want to address here is primarily intrusion (although the others are important, too). What can we do about this?

I was talking to Jessica and she said that security was our primary concern, since body hacking is a problem. However, I noted that although that may be true, intrusion is chronologically more immediate, since the Chip could never be launched without it being solved - whereas security is an issue once it's launched.

link5 comments|post comment

The Chip: Required Faculty [Dec. 1st, 2005|06:52 pm]
Napkin Philosophy

This is the team we would need to design and implement a functional CBE architecture.
  • neurologist
    • so we can understand the workings of the brain and incorporate this knowledge
  • electrical engineer
    • powering the units, electrical signals
  • computer engineer
    • signal processing and chip design
  • computer scientist and/or philosopher/logician
    • modeling of the components and technologies
  • network and computer security specialist (computer science)
    • to secure the Chip, its operating system, its networking, etc., to prevent mind and cbe hacking
  • computer programmer
    • to code the Chip components and write applications for it
  • molecular biologist
    • to understand the chemical processes
  • physiologist/medical doctor
    • health affects
  • psychologist
    • psychological effects of the Chip
  • technical communicator
    • documentation, marketing
  • lawyer
    • we presume we'll have legal issues
linkpost comment

Proposal: On "the Chip" and Human Potential [Nov. 29th, 2005|10:12 pm]
Napkin Philosophy
[Tags|, ]

Every decade, every year, and, in fact, every single day, what it means to be human is constantly redefined. Then, with the advent of the microprocessor and consequently the personal computer (PC), this redefining process took a sudden leap forward. The possibilities seemed endless once most people became acquainted with the Internet. For those who thought this, let me introduce something completely new and revolutionary to this assumption - the Chip. Read more...Collapse )
linkpost comment

Love Theory: Vector calculus and object-oriented programming [Nov. 29th, 2005|08:52 pm]
Napkin Philosophy

Add little arrows above a and b if you wish, but I don't know how to do that in html.

This our model of the two people in the relationship:

λa = (τb, ιb, λb)
λb = (τa, ιa, λa)

That is, a person's love for the other person (i.e. a's love for b) is dependent on how they view b's traits (τb), how a views interactions with b (ιb) and how a perceives b loves themb). There was some disagreement about where to put a and b, but I figured keeping them uniform for the vector-tuple set would be a good idea.

Furthermore, the third term in the 3-tuple must be changed, we found out, since person a can not know the lambda factor of the other person. I'll get to that later (1).

We considered how this could be modeled with recurrence equations (a la Algorithms), but that was doomed to failure since we have two different equations that rely on each other AND time, instead of just one equation referring to itself over time (e.g., an = an-1 + an-2).

All we know is that we need to model λ(t) (2), so we can derive the integral, ∫λdt and the derivative λ' - the satisfaction in the relationship, and the "direction" the relationship is heading, respectively.


  1. Derive an object-oriented (OO) model of subjects a and b with private data(τother and &iotaother) and public methods (used by the other subject to find out information, like how much they like them - some function used by the other subject to get an estimate of λother).

  2. Model λ(t) in a definitive format - recurrence equation, otherwise recursive, or non-recursive.

  3. Figure out the starting points (in time) for all of the members of the equation and how they relate to each other. What we know at this point is that, if S(x) is the starting point for variable x, then S(λb) > S(ιa) > S(τa).

  4. ι depends on λ, but we don't know how yet.

  5. In the OO model, the interactions between the objects with the public functions is time-based and happens one-at-a-time and this should, ideally, get rid of the need for recursion, if we can figure out when the time variable is going to change, since the references between the objects (a and b) seem to be at the same time.

    λ ----> λ
    ^ <----|

  6. Each object, in the above model (a and b), has a "cache" which stores inforamtion about the other object that affects or "filters" their perception of the data collected from the other object.

  7. Find a logical basis for this model's premises and theorems. Very important!
link1 comment|post comment

Love Theory: initial proposal [Oct. 10th, 2005|02:50 pm]
Napkin Philosophy
[Tags|, ]

Our basic outline of mathematical love so far

The love a person has for their partner is represented by the tuple

L = (τ, ι, λ)
  • τ = The "trait" factor, or the measure of how much one enjoys the other person's traits - personality, physical appearance, etc.
  • ι = The "interaction" factor, or the measure of how much one enjoys the other's company including discussions, activities, etc.
  • λ = "The lambda factor", the amount of perceived love from the other person

This can be further modeled by binary state machines A and B with L being the current state, τ, ι and λ being the input to the state function F(L), and the two state machines being dependent on each other for input but otherwise independent.

F(L) = c1τ + c2ι + c3λ

We ran into the problem of outside influences affecting the state of love and a person holding onto the love without the lambda factor.

We attempted to solve these by combining them into some possible solutions:

  • L = (τ, ι, λ, F2) where F2 is an "outsider" tuple independent of A's or B's tuple/state (the interloper, if you will)
  • F2 perhaps being a comparison function (L1 > L0)

link2 comments|post comment

Introduction Post [Dec. 30th, 2020|12:00 am]
Napkin Philosophy

This is a collection of all of the topics we discuss in this community. Each post links to a collection of all of its posts, by livejournal's tagging mechanism. The first post in each of these collections will be the proposal.

To read all proposals and get a quick summary of each of these topics, click here. For a quick reference to all tags in this community, click here.

To propose a new topic, make a post that has your topics short name (e.g., "love theory", "the chip", etc.), an explanation of the problem you're proposing to solve, make the post friends-only (of course!), tag it as the short name AND proposal - e.g., tag = "proposal, love theory", and suggest a priority group for it to go under.

A motioning system is also used for proposals. After a proposal has been discussed, a motion to add the topic permanently can be made by any user except the proposal writer, if the motion is seconded by yet another user then the proposal becomes a regular topic. The initial motion should also include the level at which the new topic should be placed.

priority group 1 - get these done soon: priority group 2 - work on these casually:
  • sqo (a model to learn rules for semantic query optimization)
priority group 3 - start planning these:
  • philosophical politics (combining plato meritocracy and representative democracy)
  • object-oriented ontology (using computer science theory to aid in philosophy theory)
  • modeling - the role of intuition and logic in modeling
priority group 4 - somewhat distant future topics:
  • korea New Songdo (sharing databases across society)
  • theoretical education (driving education toward theory/logic)
linkpost comment

[ viewing | 10 entries back ]
[ go | later ]