Bruno Marchal wrote: > Le 29-oct.-06, à 17:43, David Nyman a écrit : > > > Peter, when you said that the physical might be 'relations all the way > > down', and I asked you what would you find if you went 'all the way > > down', you replied 'primary matter'. IOW, you posit primary matter as a > > 'bare substrate' to which are attached whatever properties theory or > > experiment may suggest. Consequently, isn't it the case that you are > > defining this 'bare substrate' (which by posit has no properties of its > > own) as whatever-it-is that is RITSIAR (i.e. you might say that it's > > what exists)? Bruno, aren't you making essentially the same claim for > > AUDA, in attempting to derive all properties from it? > > > P. Jones posit a primary matter having no properties, and he does not > explain how things with properties can emerge from that.
I don't explain *rationalistically* -- that is I do not show how properties are entailed by inevitable logic from the posit of matter -- because I am not in the business of rationalism. That matter has the properties it has is an contingent fact which is known empirically. (Of course everyone is a contingentists to some extent, since no-one can show that the non-existence of matter of contingency is itself necessary). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
