On 24 February 2015 at 09:03, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > But then this undermines the idea that the arithmetic existential > quantifier provides the same "exists" as ostensive physical existence. >
That is clearly not being suggested by comp. Comp suggests that physical existence is "maya" - an appearance generated by underlying platonic forms. If you are conflating the equals sign with physical existence, no wonder you've taken against comp rather than merely being agnostic about it. Also, did you give some reason to doubt the Turing emulability of brains, or to think true randomness is a coherent notion? Sorry I don't have time to read everything, so if so I may have missed those. -- 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.
