George Levy wrote:
> Stephen Paul King wrote: > > >little discussion has > >been given to the implications of taking the 1st person aspect as primary or > >fundamental. Could you point me toward any that you have seen? > > > > > > Hi Stephen > > Alas, I am a mere engineer, not a philosopher. The only author I can > point you to is John Locke who I was told had some view similar to the > ones I expressed. I have formed my opinions mostly independently in the > process of writing a book (unpublished :'( ) I think that science is > moving gradually toward first person - starting with Galileo's > relativity, then Einstein's relativity and finally with QM (MWI). As > science had progressed, the observer has acquired a greater and greater > importance. Extrapolating to the limit, "I" becomes central and its > existence anthropically defines (creates) the world where it resides. Science may have moved close to making the observer central epistemically , but it has not room for the idea that observers are ontologically fundamental. Observers are people, homo sapiens, the product of millions of years of evolution. Scientifically speaking. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
