2009/9/24 Flammarion <peterdjo...@yahoo.com>:

> Why harp on the fact that CTM isn't physicalist enough, if you think
> physicalism is equally sueless? After all, phsycialism is just PM
> +structure.
> The difference is that the structure is finer-grained.

Agreed.  But the harping was motivated entirely by its relevance to
the supervenience dispute within CTM.  If CTM is a physical theory, it
should be able to appeal directly and consistently to the low-level
physical account; if it can't, we need another strategy to
disambiguate its actual relation to the physical account.  The latter
conclusion is what motivates the reversal of matter and mathematics in
comp.  The issue is one of consistency and intelligibility.  Whether
either explanatory approach can solve the HP is a separate issue.

David


> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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