On 11 Sep 2013, at 21:25, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
wrote:
> My point was just that the verdict against Galileo was rational,
or Popperian.
I don't believe that Karl Popper was as deep a thinker as many on
this list do, but I don't think he was as big a fool as THAT!
It is question of historical facts. The Church asks Galileo to mention
that his proposal was a theory.
It is not important, because the motivation of the Church was not
based on a respect of Reason. Just that Feyerabend was correct on this
(at least).
> Aristotle was refuted, but this is usual in science. It does not
make him bad, on the contrary.
None of Aristotle's ideas about physics were even close to being
correct and could have been easily refuted even in his own day, but
instead it was held as the gospel truth for almost 2000 years.
And probably Aristotle might have some responsibility for this. But
being refuted is a glory, in science. It means that you have succeeded
to be read (not always obvious), and have been enough precise to be
wrong.
As Bertrand Russell said:
"Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although
he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this
statement by examining his wives' mouths."
Great genius makes big mistakes. You can't judge people by singling
out their stupidities.
Physics would have been better off if Aristotle had never been born.
You don't know that. Perhaps, as Plato was more correct with respect
to comp, but science might need to do detours.
Also, in theology, you are the one still under the influence of
Aristotle, which I think was due to a lack of understanding of Plato.
> By Aristotelian I just mean the theories which assume an
ontological physical universe.
I asked you this before but got no answer, if the physical universe
does not exist how would things be different if it did?
If the physical universe did not exist there would be no Moon, no
Earth, no Sun, no atoms, no John Clark, and well things would be
rather different.
But I was talking about the Aristotelian Physical Universe. This one
needs, by definition, to be assumed as a *primitive* entity. That one
imposes physicalism.
If that one would exist, and if there is no flaw in my proposal, then
we cannot be digital machine, and most probably could not evolve
through evolution, and things would also be different. I don't know,
but my point here is that it is indirectly testable.
> By Platonist theories I mean the theories which do not assume a
physical universe and which try to explain the appearance of it from
something else.
Then I am a Platonist and so is everybody who has half a brain
because clearly the appearance of something is not the same as the
thing itself. The sound of broken glass is not broken glass, the
look of broken glass is not broken glass, the feel of broken glass
is not broken glass. What "IS" broken glass? I don't have a complete
answer but It must have stable properties of some sort or I wouldn't
be able to identify it as a "thing". I don't understand why
"physical universe" isn't a good name for that collection of
properties.
The difference is the following. Some say there is a broken glass, but
forbid you to ask "why there is a broken glass?". That is what some
materialist, and all physicalist are doing for the notion of "physical
universe". They say that we cannot find an explanation of the origin
of the physical laws, and insult as irremediably idiot anyone trying
to search on that problem.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
