2009/8/19 Jesse Mazer <laserma...@hotmail.com>:

>> >> I completely agree that **assuming primary matter** computation is "a
>> >> physical process taking place in brains and computer hardware".  The
>> >> paraphrase argument - the one you said you agreed with - asserts that
>> >> *any* human concept is *eliminable*
>> >
>> > No, reducible, not eliminable. That is an important distinction.
>> Not in this instance. The whole thrust of the paraphrase argument is
>> precisely to show - in principle at least - that the reduced concept
>> can be *eliminated* from the explanation. You can do this with
>> 'life', so you should be prepared to do it with 'computation'.
> Well, not if you believe there are objective truths about computations that
> are never actually carried out in the physical world, like whether some
> program with an input string a googolplex digits long ever halts or not.

Yes, but here - in connection with Peter's apparent support for the
Quinean concept-reduction argument - I was specifically commenting on
the status of 'computation' **if** you assume primitive matter.  In
that case, I'm not sure what "never actually carried out in the
physical world" would mean.


> >

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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to