On Nov 20, 2008, at 11:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 20 Nov 2008, at 10:13, Kory Heath wrote:
>> What is your definition of "mathematicalism" here?
>
>
> Strong definition: the big "everything" is a mathematical object.
> (But perhaps this is asking too much. The whole of math is already not
> a mathematical object). So:
>
> Weak definition: every thing is mathematical, except everything!

##
Advertising

Ok. Do you know of anyone else who uses the term in that way? I don't
even find it in Tegmark's papers. As I said, it only gets a handful of
hits on Google, and they're basically all us.
I don't like "cognitive immaterialism" (or anything with
"immaterialism"), because it implies that I don't believe in matter. I
guess you could say that I don't, but it's closer to the truth to say
that I think that mathematical facts simply *are* what materialists
(gropingly, confusedly) call physical matter. It would be like me, as
an opponent of vitalism, calling myself an "a-lifer". It's not that I
don't believe in life. I just that I think that molecules, bits,
patterns, whatever, are the things that play the role that the
vitalists have (gropingly, confusedly) called the "life-force".
I like "Mathematical Physicalism", if it's possible for me to keep
that term distinct from your "mathematicalism".
-- 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
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---