Hi Bruno Marchal Specific properties, at least down here, are needed if you accept Leibniz' dictum that identical entities cannot exist in this contingent world, for they would have the same identity.
I'm inclined to say that that is also true in Platonia, which would be a disaster, for you could not say 1 = 1. A saving grace might be that one of those 1's is before, and the other, after the equal sign. That is, the numbers are distinguished by context. [Roger Clough], [[email protected]] 1/16/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-15, 08:51:12 Subject: Re: Math-> Computation-> Mind -> Geometry -> Space -> Matter On 13 Jan 2013, at 20:14, Stephen P. King wrote: > On 1/13/2013 2:02 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> On 1/13/2013 12:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> OK. My point is that if we assume computationalism it is >>> necessarily so, and constructively so, so making that hypothesis >>> testable. >>> >>> We have the logical entaiment: >>> >>> Arithmetic -> computations -> consciousness -> sharable dreams -> >>> physical reality/matter -> human biology -> human consciousness. >>> >>> It is a generalization of "natural selection" operating from >>> arithmetical truth, and in which the physical reality is itself >>> the result of a self-selection events (the global first person >>> indeterminacy). >>> >>> This generalizes both Darwin and Everett, somehow. >> >> But you stop one step too soon. >> >> Arithmetic -> computations -> consciousness -> sharable dreams -> >> physical reality/matter -> human biology -> human consciousness -> >> arithmetic. >> >> That there is something fundamental is unscientific dogma. >> >> Brent >> > Hi, > > I agree with Brent but would refine the point to say that 'that > there is something fundamental that has particular properties is > unscientific dogma'. A dogma is only something that you cannot doubt or question. Now something fundamental without properties is just meaningless. In my opinion. How could anything emerge from something without any properties? You have not been able to explain this, up to now. Bruno > > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en > . > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
