On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:30:08PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 2) We are type, not token. There is no physical token. (with comp). 
> Parfit thinks we are token. I have not the Parfit under the hand, I 
> will give you the pages later. I don't think there are any mathematical 
> token either. It looks like Parfit makes us token for avoiding 
> immortality at the start. 

Having recently read Parfit, I would add that the "type vs token"
debate echoes in some strange way the "RSSA vs ASSA" debate.

Perhaps I'm barking the wrong tree here, but for the moment I'll leave
this as a "criticise and discuss" question to the class :) 

*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.

A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics                                    0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
Australia                                http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02

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