Le 30-mars-06, à 20:22, 1Z a écrit :
> I think > that having a richer ontology automatically makes it easier > to solve metaphysical problems, since you can say that X , Y or Z > is intrinsic to the universe and therefore not to be "explained away" > as something else This is so true that with such ontological sort of explanation, you can explain everything: just say "because of the will of God". Saying "intrinsic to the universe" is just as easy explanation. It is bad theology. I appreciate you are aware of an inflation problem (HP, White Rabbits, ...) related with modal, or mathematical, or arithmetical realism. Read my posts or read my papers (or my thesis in french), but in a nutshell, if you take seriously that you (your first person experiences) are invariant for a "physical" digital transformation (cf "yes doctor"), then it follows *necessarily* that the "physical" emerges from arithmetical or number theoretical truth. This is a statical truth capable or explaining how "from inside" first person are confronted to relatively stable information flux. The proof is constructive in the sense that it shows a path for doing the extraction, and such an extraction has already been confirmed, very partially of course. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
