On 19 Jun 2016, at 19:59, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 6/19/2016 9:45 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Calculation have been defined mathematically, and shown to exist in
elementary arithmetic.
Which is not the same as to exist in the world.
Indeed.
Especially when the world is made by a God in six days.
The question is which is the best to assume when we want to explain
world appearance. But the UDA makes impossible to reify the notion of
physical world and keep mechanism at the same time. So, once we assume
computationalism, we already assume elementary arithmetic, and we
can't assume anything more for the ontology. We can (and have to)
assume more but we can only do that as convenient epistemological
fiction or shortcut. That is why I "model" the ontology with RA, and
the observer as PA. I put already the induction axioms of PA in PA's
epistemology. Wuth UDA, we know that the physical reality is a
psychological first person plural construct.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
