On Sep 18, 12:00 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2011, at 19:07, Stephen P. King wrote:
> > You seem posit as primitive some form of number and then build a
> > structure upon it that serves as an explanatory model for
> > 'everything', including the appearance of a physical world with
> > laws, all the while not explaining how it is that the primitives
> > have the properties that they have other than pointing to our
> > experience of mathematical entities.
> I postulate only two things:
> 1) that I can survive with a digital brain in this mundane consensual
> reality (the nature of which I am neutral about)
> 2) that elementary proposition on natural numbers are true
> independently of me and you. All scientists do this.
Even if 2 is true, nothing has independent access to those natural
numbers. A scientist relies on their neurology to remember numbers and
calculate with them. With changes to the neurological substrate,
through dementia, drugs, disease, emotion, distraction, etc, we can
lose even the sense of the elementary propositions. We can return to a
childlike state where numbers have no meaning. A computer relies upon
it's hardware. It can be damaged and/or make errors. Sense-making does
not happen in platonia - it happens through the dynamic relation
between platonia (massenergy singularity) and anti-platonia (timespace
division). There is no access to platonic arithmetic except as it is
reflected and reflected again through (1-p ÷ 3-p) sensorimotive (±)
reality tunnels through the (3-p * 1-p) singularity (ground).
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