On 1/27/2014 2:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Jan 2014, at 02:08, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/26/2014 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I have provided the definition. Should I repeat?
God is the transcendental reality we bet on, and which is supposed to be responsible
for my or our existence.
Sounds like "physics" to me.
Yes. if you believe "theologically" that physics is the ultimate explanation of our
existence.
If physics is your theology,
No, physics is the scientific search for what is fundamental. Theology is the defense of
the idea that god is what is fundamental. Physics puts no constraint on what is
fundamental except that it can studied in a public way.
then the UDA shows that it is a non-mechanist theology.
It's non-material - but as you often point out "material" is undefined.
You can't say "yes" to the doctor, as you can't survive the substitution "qua
computatio". You need some magic properties of the physical object to do that.
Why do I need any more magic than the magic that was in the neurons or molecules, which
are physical?
If not, you cannot distinguish the 1p in a physical reality and the 1p in the
arithmetical reality.
Why should they be distinct?
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.
