On 11/30/2013 7:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote:




On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 4:40 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

    On 11/30/2013 4:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

    In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids trying 
to
    explain it at the start.

    It's not worse, it's logic.  Whatever is taken as fundamental in a theory 
is not
    something explained in the theory. Your theory takes numbers and arithmetic 
for granted.


It is logical in the case of arithmetical realism to assume numbers are fundamental because it is provable that the numbers cannot be explained in terms of anything simpler,

I'd like to see that proof. I don't think 'red' can be explained in terms of something simpler - but that doesn't mean it's fundamental nor that it can't be explained. "Simpler" can be a complicated concept.

but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler.

Of course not.  That would the point the it's fundamental.

Brent

--
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.

Reply via email to