On 12/30/2013 7:44 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Brent,
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:20 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 12/30/2013 6:09 PM, LizR wrote:
On 31 December 2013 07:44, meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 12/30/2013 2:07 AM, LizR wrote:
On 30 December 2013 21:02, Stephen Paul King <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear Bruno,
Why do you not consider an isomorphism between the Category
ofcomputer/universal-numbers and physical realities? That way we
can avoid
a lot of problems!
I think that it is because of your insistence of the Platonic view
that
the material/physical realm is somehow lesser in ontological status
and
the assumption that a timeless totality = the appearance of change
(and
its measures) is illusory. I would like to be wrong in this
presumption!
The problem is that assuming the material / physical realm as
fundamental gets
you no further than assuming that "God did it!" It's a "shut up and
calculate"
(or shut up and pray) ontology.
With materialism you just have a "brute fact" - well, maybe that's it,
maybe
there /is /just a brute, unexplained fact. But us ape descended life
forms
like to look for explanations even beneath the apparent brute facts!
But "Everything happens" is just as useless as "God did it". A theory
that can
explain anything fails to explain at all.
It can't explain /anything/. It just says that all outcomes of the laws of
physics
are instantiated. This requires less information than saying that a specific
outcome of the LOP is instantiated, assuming the LOP allow more than one
outcome.
But I feel that you must already know this. Are you just being Devil's
Advocate, or
do you honestly not see the usefulness of multiverse theories?
Stephen isn't talking about a multiverse as implied by physics, he's
talking about
an immaterialist theory, a "timeless Platonic totality", which I can only
suppose
consists of everything not self-contradictory or some such.
Geee, it is that hard for you to parse what I right and make sense of it? How many times
have I claimed that both materialism and immaterialism have severe problems and that I
reject them. Sheesh, learn to read.
Sorry, my mistake.
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
