Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Le 10-oct.-06, à 03:52, Russell Standish a écrit :
>
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 10:35:05AM -0700, 1Z wrote:
> >>
> >> The idea that materialism is not compatible with computationalism
> >> is a bold and startling claim.
> >
> > Materialism comes in a couple of different flavours. The one that COMP
> > is incompatible with is "eliminative materialism", also sometimes
> > known as physicalism.
>
>
> Comp has indeed be shown to be incompatible with physicalism (the
> doctrine that physics is the fundamental science).

I don't know who you think has shown this. Maudlins argument
relies on the Activity Thesis, which is an independent claim
from "physics is the fundamental science". Your argument
shows that phyics emerges from maths (given the existence of
an immaterial UD), making matter redundant;
but it is equally the case that maths emerges from
physics (given the existence of matter), making Platonia redundant.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to