On 3/9/2011 4:50 AM, David Nyman wrote:
Peter, your comments appear to illustrate a basic confusion between
ontological and epistemological claims that makes me think that you
haven't taken on board the fundamental distinction entailed in Bruno's
"Ontological reduction does not necessarily entail epistemological
*elimination*, but it does entail ontological*elimination*."
This strikes me a mere semantic argumentation. Houses are made of
bricks. Bricks are made of atoms. Atoms are made of strings. This is
reduction; ontological reduction. X is reduce to Y and relations among
Y. Elimination is not mentioned anywhere. There is no justification
for eliminating anything; either ontologically or epistemologically
(whatever that means?). There are still atoms and bricks and houses.
"Reduction" is a word we invented to describe this. I don't know why
someone wants to equate it with "elimination". What would it mean to
"eliminate" bricks? To banish them? To always refer to them by long
descriptive phrases in terms of atoms?
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