On 1/21/2013 8:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
If you don't take arithmetic as primitive, I can prove that you cannot derive both addition and multiplication, nor the existence of computer. Then everything around me does not make sense. If you believe you can derive them, then do it. But you proceed like a literary philosophers, so I have doubt you can derive addition and multiplication in the sense I would wait for.
 Dear Bruno,

Is this statement correctly written? How is it coherent that I need to derive from arithmetic that which is already in arithmetic? It seems to me that the physical activity of counting is the source of derivation of arithmetics! Of cource we cannot just consider the activity of a single entity but that of many entities, each counting in their own ways and developing communication methods between themselves. Materialism fails since it cannot explain how it is possible for material things to have representations of things, intensionality, such as numbers. Numbers fail, as a ground of ontology, as they can not transform themselves and remain the same. Matter is exactly that which can transform and remain the same!



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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to