I am behind, because I was away delivering Science talk to Star Trek
I am uncertain what to take away from this thread, and could use the
As an aside, I read(or tried to) read the SANE paper on the plane.
On Aug 10, 11:24 am, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> >> Bruno's "comp" is something rather different and idiosyncratic
> > You keep saying this. This is a lie.
> I am not yet entirely sure of this. Let me correct my statement by
> saying that this is just a common lie, similar to those who have been
> made purposefully in the seventies, and repeated since then by people
> who even brag on this in some private circles, as it has been reported
> to me more than 20 times (since 1973).
> You have stated in this list many times recurrently that I assume
> platonism without ever telling us why you think so, or what texts
> makes you think so.
> Recently you have make the "progress" to attribute me only, now, an
> implicit assumption of platonism. That is a progress, because it means
> you have eventually realize that I am not making that assumption
> explicitly, and that what I call Arithmetical Realism is a much weaker
> statement. Good.
> But you still seems to want to attribute me platonism as an implicit
> That is not enough to refute an argument. If you believe sincerely
> that I am using an implicit assumption of platonism in the UDA
> reasoning, you have to show us where in the reasoning the assumption
> is implicitly used.
> If you dismiss this, you look like those materialist computationalist
> who just assume there is an error because the result contradict their
> theory, and then don't take the time to even read the argument.
> That is not a scientific attitude. It is an appeal to dogma. It
> prevents serious people searching some possible "real" mistakes or
> awkwardness in the reasoning.
> Sorry for having to make such remark. But it is highly confusing for
> everybody when people ascribes to other people the product of their
> own imagination, especially in difficult and new domains (new to
> scientific attitude).
> At least you do it publicly, which makes me think you could still be
> "not lying", but only under the spell of materialist wishful thinking.
> Bruno Marchal
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
For more options, visit this group at