Note: forwarded message attached.
--- Begin Message ---


--- Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Le 02-nov.-05, à 21:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit
> :
> 
> > I should make another point, that it seems very
> likely that the worm 
> > has no way of developing the in-apple technology
> to find out about 
> > quantum mechanics or DNA.  This emphasizes the
> fact that we, with our 
> > quantum theories, M-theories, and loop gravity
> etc. could be just as 
> > far away from explaining the universe as the worm
> is.
> 
> All theories empirically inferred will suffer from
> that weakness, but a 
> theory based on philosophical principles will not
> necessarily suffer 
> from that drawback.
> Probably physics is a too serious matter for being
> studied by physicist 
> :)
> 
> Bruno
> 
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

Bruno,
I love your closing sentence! I am not a physicist.

Why do you think that philosophers don't use some
anthropocentric mind-work in identifying 'principles'?

Our Earthenlocked thinking *tool* (we call it usually:
the brain) works 'humanly' whether in physics or in
any other mental exercise (philoso[hy included, even
the (pardon me) logic. 
We may speculate how to step out (over?) these Earth
bound limitations, but even then we speculate using
our brain in the process. 
Allegedly some people don't use their brains, but that
has to be another list <G>

John Mikes
> 
> 


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to