2015-10-07 20:46 GMT+02:00 Brent Meeker <[email protected]>: > > > On 10/7/2015 4:12 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> But here Clark contradicts all the textbook on the subject. In fact all >> what John Clarks says here is that you cannot get a physical object from an >> arithmetical computations, which is trivial, but does not prove the >> existence of the physical object, as physical is a relative relational >> notion in arithmetic. >> Those type of argument are only the usual knocking on the table. >> > > Which is very good evidence for the existence of a physical object.
But it is no evidence at all about the ontological status of such object... so what is it for ? Computationalism, MWI, do not deny the existence of physical objects... even subjective idealism does not deny you interact with physical object, it is the reality/ontological status of those which is questioned... so what's the point to use such argument ? Quentin > > > Brent > > > -- > 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. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- 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.
