On 14 Oct 2015, at 00:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 10/13/2015 3:04 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 13/10/2015 11:43 pm, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-10-13 14:26 GMT+02:00 Bruce Kellett
<[email protected]>:
...
Who said matter was the end point?
You... why do you insist on matter, if it is not primary and can
be made of something else ?
Who said matter was not primary?
Who said it was ? If it is not, then reality can be explained in
terms of computations alone, and matter could be a product of
computations... You dislike that idea, that somehow must mean
matter is primary in your view... so IMO, you're saying matter is
primary, don't you ?
I am not denying that, in all likelihood, matter is primary. I do
not have any problems with that idea. In fact, it is a very
productive position to take, and has led to all manner of useful
results: none of which have been produced by computationalism.
Matter is primary, and mathematics is simply a game played
according to a set of rules developed from our experience of the
physical world. The utility of mathematics is completely explained
by the fact that it is based on physical experience. The utility of
physics is explained in the same way.
Arguments over "primary matter" are really just semantic. If we
have a theory of the world its ontology is primary whatever it is.
Whether we call that ur-stuff matter or a ray in Hilbert space or a
computation is just picking a name; whatever it is it us "primary"
and that means it's not analyzed in terms of something else (at
least in the given putative theory of the world). This is most
obvious in physics where "primary matter" has been Platonic solids,
solids/liquids/gases, atoms, vortices, wave functions, consistent
histories, strings, D-branes,... And similarly in mathematics at
different times the fundamental stuff has been points/planes/lines,
integers, sets, homotopies, categories, propositions,... There is
no definition of "primary matter" or "basis of mathematics" because
what is primary is in a sense indefinable except to say it's primary.
The question is just which one you use. Comp use only numbers (or
combinators ...). It works until now.
Physics use either a wave + a non intelligible theory of mind, or it
uses Comp + a wave. But this does not work. (UDA).
Bruno.
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
