----- Original Message ----- From: "David Nyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Everything List" <everything-list@googlegroups.com> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 8:16 PM Subject: Re: The anti-roadmap - an alternative 'Theology'
Dave, thanks fir the friendly and decent words. It was not questionable that you did not 'attack' comp as false, I reflected principally as a discussion-technique. I like Bruno a lot and use some not-so-kind argumentation style lately to tease out from him a stronger argument. We agree in the goal of learning. You are more of a professional than I am. John > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ... > John > > Thanks for taking the trouble to express your thoughts at such length. > I won't say too much now, as I have to leave shortly to meet a long > lost relative - from Hungary! However, I just want to make sure it's > clear, both for you and the list, that: > > > > "Comp is false". Let's see where *that* leads..... > > isn't intended as a definitive claim that comp *is* false. Rather, *if* > it is false, in what ways specifically, and what are the alternatives? > Can they be stated as clearly and explicitly as Bruno is trying to do > for his approach ('to see where it leads')? Hence the 'anti-roadmap', > or perhaps better - 'another roadmap', or some ideas for one. Most of > the thoughts in it were originally expressed in some earlier postings > on 'The Fabric of Reality' list, which Bruno was kind enough to copy to > this list. Anyway, it's intended as a point of departure (for me > certainly) and I look forward to some strenuous critiques. > > One misgiving I have, now that I've finally grasped (I think) that the > comp 'theology' entails 'faith' in the number realm, is that by this > token it seeks to provide a TOE (Bruno, am I wrong about this?) That > is, beginning with an assertion of 'faith' in UDA + the number realm, > we seek to axiomatise and 'prove' a complete theory of our origins. > Bruno is a very modest person, but I worry about the 'modesty' of the > goal. Of course, it's highly probable that I just misunderstand this > point. However, I'm having trouble with my faith in numbers, > monseigneur. My own intuition begins from my own indexical > self-assertion, my necessity, generalised to an inclusive > self-asserting necessity extending outwards indefinitely. I don't look > for a way to 'get behind' this, and to this extent I don't seek a TOE, > because I can't believe that 'everything' (despite the name of this > list) is theoretically assimilable. This may well be blindness more > than modesty, however. > > Having said this, of course in a spirit of learning I'm trying to > understand and adopt *as if* true the comp assumptions, and continue to > put my best efforts into getting my head around Bruno's roadmap as it > emerges. I have a lot of experience of changing my mind (and maybe I'll > get a better one!) > > David > > truncated --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---