On 23 Apr 2017, at 04:08, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Quentin Anciaux
<[email protected]> wrote:
> How can you justify logic from physics if logic is primary to
prove anything?
Physics does not need logic or mathematics or anything else to
prove it's existence to us because we all have the ability to detect
physics by direct experience,
Physics? I guess you mean "the physical world".
But that was already refute by the antics, in all enough great
civilizations. Children comes to this point very often by themselves.
We can detect physical worlds, but we can't detect *primary* physical
worlds, nor can be detect if we dream or awake, nor if the dreams is
due to a brain in vat, or a brain emulated by Robinson Arithmetic.
and that far outranks proof.
It proofs, but only to you, and only that you detect something. To
test a metaphysical assumption, you need to derive indirect
consequences.
Bruno
Humans originally invented mathematics to better understand and
manipulate the physical world, and logic is the stuff that
produces no inconsistencies with our observation of that physical
world.
John K Clark
--
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 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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
