Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Le 09-juil.-06, à 17:15, Lennart Nilsson a écrit : > > > I really think that we should infer both the substantial world and the > > numerical world from the middleground so to speak, from our > > observations. > > > But why should we infer a substantial world? Substantial or primary or > primitive matter is an incredible metaphysical extrapolation. It is a modest metaphysical posit which can be used to explain a variety of observed phenomena, ranging from Time and Change to the observed absence of Harry Potter universes. > I still > want to (re)study why Aristotle made that step, except as a tool for > burying the mind-body problem. As opposed to the mind-mathematics problem. > Sade is very clear on the role of matter and why linking consciousness > to it: to make people believed their act have few personal > consequences. La Mettrie also begin the celbnrate "materialist" > dissolution of the first person, including its responsibility feelings. > The modern materialist have to be a first person eliminativist. > I doubt less about consciousness and the number 317 than about *stuffy* > strings or waves, which are not even assumed in physical theories, > except in the background for separating conceptual issues from > practice. Stuffiness explains why the only one logical possibility is real. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
