On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 5:28:25 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 8 Sep 2018, at 23:53, John Clark <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > Bruno Marchal Wrote: > > *> I cannot see primary matter. In fact I am not sure what you mean by >> matter, or by “mathematical-material universe”. [...] I have proven (40 >> years ago) that materialism (the belief in some primary matter, or >> physicalism) and Mechanism are incompatible.* > > > If you don't know what "matter" means then you certainly don't know what > "primary matter" means, so what the hell did you prove 40 years ago? > > > That if mechanism is true, the observable has to rely on a sophisticated > “sum” on all computations. > > Matter = observable > > Primary matter is the doctrine by Aristotle according to which there is a > primary physical universe, or a primary sort of (non mathematical) reality > from which those observable would have emerge. With mechanism, it can be > shown that the laws pertaining on the observable have to be reduced to some > mode of arithmetical self-reference. > > > > I'm not even going to ask what you think physicalism means because any > such answer has to include physics and physics has to involve matter which > you admit confuses you. > > > No, it does not confuse me. It is just shown inconsistent to believe that > we have to assume its existence. A realm is primary if it cannot be reduced > to some other field”. May believe that biology is not primary, because it > can be reduced (apparently) to chemistry and physics. Similarly, with > Mechanism, physics is reducible to number theory or Turing equivalent. > > > > > > And for the same reason I'm not going to ask about "Mechanism" , the reply > would only contain yet more words you can neither define nor give examples > of. > > > Digital Mechanism is the doctrine that there is a level of description of > our body such that we can survive with a (physical) digital brain or body, > if it faithfully represents our body’s functionality at that description > level. > > Bruno > > > I seems *possible *to me that there could be a matter decompiler/transporter/compiler that takes *me*, decompiles *me* into some code, transports that code, and compiles that code into a digital-technology-based "brain" in some sort of "body". And it would be *me 2*. and "I" would exist again.
But if it never recompiled me into any kind of material output - I don't think I would exist anymore. - pt -- 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.
