On Nov 18, 2008, at 3:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> This question is addressed mainly to Jason and Kory, who, it seems  
> to me,  have still a little problem with step 7, if I may say,

As far as I know, I understand and accept your step 7, but clearly  
something I've said makes you think otherwise. I'm going to reply to  
your previous replies to me, but life is getting in the way, so it may  
be a day or two.

In the meantime, I at least want to say that I'm pretty sure you've  
read a lot more into my term "mathematical physicalism" than I  
intended. I use "mathematical physicalism" simply to refer to the idea  
that the materialist's picture of matter is problematic in the way  
that the vitalists idea of the "life force" is problematic, and that  
mathematical facts-of-the-matter unproblematically fill the role that  
this problematic "physical matter" is supposed to fill. I thought that  
you agreed with this, but with all of your talk about how you don't  
have "positions", I'm not so sure anymore. :)

Anyway, I *don't* intend for "mathematical physicalism" to refer to  
(for instance) the idea that the Physics that emerges from the gluing  
conditions on machine dreams is capable of being described by a  
computable mathematical object. (Is that what you thought I was  
saying?) In fact, I suspect that the physics that emerges from from  
comp is "uncomputable", or worse. But I don't know enough math and  
logic to go any further than that at the moment.

Also in the meantime, where can I now find your steps 1-8? All of the  
old links seem to be dead.

-- Kory

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 

Reply via email to