On 10 March 2014 16:50, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 01:09:43PM +1300, LizR wrote: > > On 10 March 2014 12:38, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > But my point remains, at this point in time, intrasubjective > consistency is > > > not sufficient to demonstrate the existence of an external reality > > > independent of the process of observation, contra Edgar's claim. > > > > > > > Even the existence of intersubjective consistency is hypothetical (doubly > > so when you have to deal with teenagers...) > > > > Granted intersubjective consistency is a little hard to test > directly. However, it is a consequence of the anthropic principle: If > I am consistent with my environment (as a consequence of the AP), then > so must all other observers sharing that environment. The AP is > empirically quite well tested, ISTM. > > The Occam catastrophe issue, as discussed in my book, means that the > AP, and consequently intersubjective agreement on part of observed > reality is a consequence of bitstring ensemble theories. > I intend to (re-)re-read your book soon so I will check that. In the meantimne.....it's all very well having theoretical justification, and in practice I agree it seems fairly reasonable to assume....but can it be tested any more directly? -- 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/d/optout.
