Bruno Marchal wrote: > Le 10-oct.-06, à 16:08, 1Z a écrit : > > > > > If your Platonism is about truth, bot existence, you cannot show > > that matter is redundant, > > > Ah! I am glad you see my argument is a redundancy argument. If comp is > true we cannot rely on the hypothesis of primary matter to explain even > just the physical laws (not to talk on consciousness).
Primary matter was never *supposed* to explain either of those things. That is a straw-man version of materialism. > > because if your UD doesn't exist > > in Platonia, > > > ... but the UD exists in Platonia. The ontological status of the UD is > the same as the ontological status of the number 5. Whatever that is. A purely mathematical argument can tell us they have the same ontological status; it cannot tell us what that status is. The question of what a mathematical existence-claim means ontologically requires a philosophical argument. > Peano Arithmetic > can prove the existence of the UD. The mathematical existence. Pure maths cannot prove anything ontologically. > > > > > it doesn't exist in the material world either, so it > > doesn't exist at all, and therefore cannot replace anything that does > > exist. > > Actually an instantiation of the UD exists in the "material world" too > (as far as the material world exists of course). The UD is just a > prgram. You can see its code here: > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/bxlthesis/Volume4CC/ > 4%20GEN%20&%20DU.pdf But it requires infinite time to run. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---