On 26/10/2015 5:30 pm, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 05:08:21PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 26/10/2015 5:01 pm, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 03:40:45PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote:
I think Carroll's Paradox (or 'What the Tortoise Said to Achilles')
effectively undermines computationalism, or any argument that
arithmetic is prior to physics.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Tortoise_Said_to_Achilles
In order to escape the paradox, you have to resort to a formalist
approach, and that renders the formalism devoid of semantic content.
I don't see why that undermines computationalism. Could you please expand?
Modus ponens is only a formal manipulation of symbols, with no
semantic content.
Are you trying to say that modus ponens is not valid of reality, hence
computionalism is false (but that's employing modus ponens, so you've
tied yourself up in a knot)?
Or, are you trying to say that computationalism has no semantic
content because it is formal? That argument has already been run by
someone on this list - the trouble is the only semantics required are
internal to the system.
In which case, the 'semantics' have no bearing on our everyday
experience. One can act on the basis of the weight of evidence without
believing that modus ponens is truth-preserving.
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.
