On 15 Oct 2015, at 00:34, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 15/10/2015 2:31 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Computationalism has an ontology on which everyone agree. Those who
claim to disagree usually add philosophical commitment which is not
used in the reasoning.
An ontology *is* a philosophical commitment,
Not in metamathematics, nor in metaphysics or theology. An ontology is
given by the terms of the theory, which are supposed to be realized in
some model, at the meta-level.
even if 'everyone' agrees on it. If the ontology is part of the
reasoning, then it is opinion/philosophy, not logic.
Not at the meta-level. I agree this is not an easy point, but the
difficulties go away once you agree with the "final" theory, which
here is Robinson arithmetic. So you need, for the reasoning and its
conclusion to just *understand* 0, s(0), s(s(0)), ... Then the
philosophical or ontological/metaphysical/theological commitment is
invoked only when you say "yes" to the doctor. Everyone can get the
consequences of comp, even those who does not believe in comp.
Bruno
Bruce
--
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.
