On 02.07.2012 22:01 meekerdb said the following:
On 7/2/2012 12:45 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 02.07.2012 21:08 meekerdb said the following:
On 7/2/2012 11:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Where to will you place 'description' in the physicalism? Is
this just some excitation of natural neural nets or something
The description is in Platonia.
This is presumably one of the reasons that Popper at the end has
come to World 3 (equivalent of Platonia):
“If I am right that the physical world has been changed by the
world 3 products of the human mind, acting through the intervention
of the human mind then this means that the worlds 1, 2, and 3, can
interact and, therefore, that none of them is causally closed. The
thesis that the physical world is not causally closed but that it
can be acted upon by world 2 and, through its intervention, by
world 3, seems to be particularly hard to swallow for the
materialist monist, or the physicalist.”
Yet, as a consequence this should mean as Popper mentioned that
"the physical world is not causally closed".
In which case there should be observable events in the brain or
elsewhere which are caused unphysically by events in World 3. It is
not clear to me how this would comport with computationalism which
assumes that any mechanism with the same physical functionality will
always compute the same function. Perhaps quantum randomness allows
this, although the evidence seems to point to the brain being
The observable effects are human languages, mathematics, art, to name a
few things. Nevertheless I should agree thatthere is no way that I like
to explain it.
If we take physics, for example as presented in Hawking's Grand Design,
then 'description' should be just some excitations of natural neural
nets in the brains of biological machines. However, in Grand Design
there was no explanation why these excitations in the brain are able to
comprehend the M-theory that governs all the observable effects.
According to Bruno, this is another way around. Yet, for me it is also
unclear how the first person view could comprehend mathematical objects
that compose the framework of the mathematical universe. As far as I
understand, human language cannot be formalized mathematically, so it is
a puzzle how it could be created from arithmetics.
It would be nice to have both, a physical world and Platonia but then
the connection between the both is a puzzle.
Three Worlds by Karl Popper
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at