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 

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.



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 

Reply via email to