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
> > 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:
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 firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at