On 10 June 2014 10:13, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6/9/2014 2:46 PM, LizR wrote: > > I guess I could venture that it's the ontology of any TOE in which >> interactions are all 3p. >> >> OK, thanks. So I would guess that it's equivalent to eliminativism, as > I think it's called - the idea that consciousness is an illusion ("albeit a > persistent one"). It does seem that way to me. > > I don't think it implies eliminativism. There's still temperature even > though we have statistical mechanics. I think there's far too much > importance given to "what's fundamental" and it leads to calling everything > else and illusion. I doubt that Bruno thinks arithmetic is an illusion > just because what's fundamental is 0, S, +, and *. A correction to this > kind of obsession with essence is why I like my virtuous circle of > explanation. >
So how can all interactions be 3p? Maybe I misunderstood. It seems to me that consciousness implies there's 1p stuff going on? -- 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.
