On 18 Aug, 10:51, Jesse Mazer <laserma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:55:35 -0700
> > Subject: Re: Emulation and Stuff
> > From: peterdjo...@yahoo.com
> > To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>
> > >However, some physicists - Julian Barbour for one - use
> > > the term in a way that clearly has reference, as I think does Bruno.
>
> > Any Platonists thinks there is a real immaterial realm, that is the
> > whole point
>
> What does "real" mean?

ITSIAR

>Once again it seems to be a synonym for existence, but you aren't defining 
>what notion of existence you're talking about, you speak as though it has a 
>single transparent meaning which coincides with your own notion of physical 
>existence.

There is a basic meaning to existence, the Johnsonion one.

>On the contrary, I think most modern analytic philosophers would interpret 
>"mathematical Platonism" to mean *only* that mathematical structures exist in 
>the Quinean sense, i.e. that there are truths about them that cannot be 
>paraphrased into truths about the physical world (whatever that is). I don't 
>think any additional notion of "existence" is normally implied by the term 
>"mathematical Platonism" (and many philosophers might not even acknowledge 
>that there are any well-defined notions of of 'existence' besides the Quinean 
>one)

It is absolutely clear from the above that if they are a) existent and
b) not physcially accountable then they
are c) immaterically existent.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to