On 12 Aug 2012, at 20:15, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 8/12/2012 10:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Aug 2012, at 16:29, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Is it possible to say that compatibilism is equivalent to Leibniz'
Thiscan be *one* interpretation of Leibniz' pre-established
harmony, but I doubt it is necessarily the only one. With comp you
can interpret the pre-established harmony by the arithmetical
truth, but to be honest, the harmony break down. The arithmetical
truth can be considered as pre-established, but it is messy,
infinitely complex, and beyond *all* theories, even theories of
everything, provably so if comp is postulated.
Given this remark about the PEH, do you agree with me that even
though arithmetic truth is prior, that it is not accessible without
This depends of what you mean by "physical action" and "accessible".
With comp you can define the physical reality by what is observable by
all numbers in arithmetic, and you can define the physical laws by
what is observable and invariant for all observers in arithmetic.
(and UDA suggests to define (in AUDA) "observable-with-P = 1" by
sigma_1, provable and consistent.
For P ≠ 1, you can drop "provable".
Note that "observable by numbers" is a short way to say "observable by
the person supported by a number relatively to its most probable
universal number (neighborhood).
Then you can define sensible by sigma_1, provable, consistent and
true. Observable leads to quanta, and sensible leads to qualia at the
"G* level". (Careful: that notion of "level" is NOT related to the
substitution level notion).
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