On Thursday, May 22, 2014 8:06:52 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 21 May 2014, at 21:50, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 7:20:27 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 21 May 2014, at 15:28, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> But now that you tell us that you believe that comp is false, I am not so >> astonished. You still miss a real opportunity to refute comp, at the same >> time. >> > > No. I don't have to say comp is false. I'm saying that the assumption is > not carrying much knowledge. It would be like in 1700 someone proposing the > universe was made of the same matter. It'd be true, we know that now. So > small and large theories came out that started with that assumption alone, > and came up with streams of logic...leading to dreams and gods and > whatever. And there'd be guys in your role and guys in my role, and in my > role they'd be saying "I don't think it's wrong, I just think the initial > assumption is not carrying much knowledge. And the guy in your role would > be saying "ah...so you do assume not-matter" > > > > But if you believe this, then you have to believe that something is wrong > in the UD Argument, as it shows that comp is a very strong hypothesis, > leading to the reversal physics/machine's psychology, or machine's > theology. What step is wrong? Are you OK with step 3 (where John Clark miss > the use of the 1p/3p distinction if you have follow the thread), or is it > step 8? > Why Bruno? I'm talking about your seed assumption. How about do the other way around. Read my post on the 'end to end structure associated wit (sic) falsification' , tell me where you disagree, or....present your falsifiability carefully in those terms. Because there's two areas here. One is issue about your initial assumption. We spent ages on that, in which I was trying to put the case for UNREALIZED assumptions. Drew a blank there. Then there's matter of your claim to falsifiability. On that one I've actually thrown down the gauntlet. The challenge is that you actually present your falsifiability in the terms I laid out. Or, you disagree with those terms in which case we can start looking for third party resolution of who is right.
-- 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.
