Le 26-janv.-07, à 19:00, Tom Caylor a écrit :
> Why do we need to eliminate first-person white rabbits? For purposes
> of science, is not elimination of third-person (or first-person plural)
> white rabbits sufficient?
That would be dishonest. You could eliminate the very idea of first
person, like the eliminativist materialist.
> So what if we hallucinate, or dream about a
> talking white rabbit?
It is because of those dreams that we have to take into account the
consistent but incorrect theories, and thus modalities or situations
with truth of Bp & Dp & ~p.
> We can come back to "scientific reality" through
> the third-person or first-person plural, i.e. methods of "objectivity"
> (third-person/first-person plural view by our own definition).
We can have objective talk on first person once we share definitions.
Recall that my motivation is the mind body problem.
Hiding that a theory is wrong for the experiences is cheating, a little
bit like physicalist explanation of the mind which most of the time
explains it away.
> By the way, I'm not implying that scientific reality is sufficient for
> meaning of life. ;)
I hope so.
> My above questions are perhaps a bit rhetorical in
> this sense. I think the answer is that we long to find meaning solely
> through science so that we can control everything, and so we *try* to
> erect science as the god over all meaning.
That is just scientism, not science. And then lobian machine are
already able to guess correctly that meaning or truth is much vaster
than reason or proof. You should love comp :-)
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