On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:48 PM, 'Roger' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> >>> Roger: Even if no mind has yet conceived the the 10^(10^(10^100))th >>> decimal point of pi, the pi proposition and therefore the process of >>> calculating its 10^(10^(10^100))th decimal point and being confident that >>> if you do the process that that number is either 0-9 are all located inside >>> the mind/head. My view is that whenever we talk about something existing, >>> we have to specify where and when it exists, that is, in what context or >>> domain it exists. A thing can exist in one place and not another. A ball >>> can exist outside the head, and a mental construct labeled "the concept of >>> a ball" can exist inside the head. >>> >> >> If a ball can exist outside the mind/head, why can't the >> 10^(10^(10^100))th decimal point of pi exist outside the mind/head? What >> property must a thing have to have an independent existence outside of any >> mind? (according to your theory?) >> >> Jason >> >> >>> So, if the pi process were carried out inside the mind/head long enough >>> to figure out the 10^(10^(10^100))th decimal point, that mental construct >>> for that number (which would be 0-9) would exist inside the mind/head but >>> not outside the mind/head. So, the mind is able to reify things (like the >>> 10^(10^(10^100))th >>> decimal point of pi) so that they exist but so that they only exist inside >>> the mind/head and not outside the mind/head. >>> >>>> >>>> > Roger: Just because things can exist outside the mind/head doesn't mean > that a specific thing does occur outside the mind/head. If the pi > proposition and the 10^(10^(10^100))th decimal point of pi can be shown > outside the mind/head or any experimental evidence for the existence of the > pi proposition or the 10^(10^(10^100))th decimal point of pi existing > outside the mind/head, I'd be happy to accept it. I can see that a circle > can exist outside the head, but I don't see anywhere outside the mind/head, > the proposition that if you divide the circle's circumference by its > diameter you get pi. > > > This definition of exists seems limited to things you can see with your eyes. But then we would have to discount other universe, past points in time, galaxies beyond the cosmological horizon, the interiors of black holes, and many other things which our theories lead us to believe exists. If we accumulate evidence for a theory, which tells us certain things exist even though we can't see them (and even better if it also accounts for why we can't/shouldn't see them) then I think we should take the implications of those theories seriously. Jason -- 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.
