On Dec 7, 10:31 am, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 12/7/2011 8:14 AM, benjayk wrote:
>
> > Most materialist just say: Well, the natural laws are just there, without
> > any particular reason or meaning behind them, we have to take them for
> > granted. But this is almost as unconvincing as saying "A creator God is just
> > there, we have to take him for granted". It makes no sense (it would be a
> > totally absurd universe), and there also is no evidence that natural laws
> > are primary (we don't find laws to describe the Big Bang and very plausibly,
> > there are none because it is a mathematical singularity).
>
> You are attributing a naive concept of physical laws to "we".  Physical laws 
> are models we
> make up to explain and predict the world.  That's why they change when we get 
> new
> information.  Mathematical singularities are in the mathematics.  Nobody 
> supposes they are
> in the world.
>
> Brent

Brent

You state: “Physical laws are models we make up to explain and predict
the world.”  Are properties of mathematics then dual, being both
representational (models) and encoded (rules) as instantiated brain
functions?

In other words could the singularity in mathematics you refer to be
further divided?

Thanks

-- 
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