> On 12 Dec 2018, at 19:26, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, December 12, 2018 at 4:07:13 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 11 Dec 2018, at 20:53, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 7:30:32 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 1:02:52 PM UTC-6, [email protected] <> >> wrote: >> >> >> On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 6:44:34 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 12:32:51 PM UTC-6, [email protected] <> >> wrote: >> As for physicists being materialists in the sense of believing there is >> nothing underlying matter as its cause, I have never heard that position >> articulated by any physicist, in person or on the Internet. AG >> >> >> >> Victor Stenger >> Materialism Deconstructed? >> https://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/materialism-deconstructed_b_2228362.html >> >> <https://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/materialism-deconstructed_b_2228362.html> >> >> >> I was once a member of Vic's discussion group. Vic believed in the reality >> of matter, in the sense that if you kick it, it kicks back. But he didn't >> deny the possibility that there could be something more fundamental >> underlying matter. This denial is what Bruno claims is the materialist >> position, but it surely wasn't Vic's position. You know this, of course, >> being a member of that group. Right? AG >> >> - pt >> >> >> I hosted Vic in Dallas in 2014 for a talk. I got to know him fairly >> personally . >> >> Homages to philosophical materialism ("matter is the fundamental substance >> in nature") is in his books. Timeless Reality in particular. >> >> One can be open-minded, or ironist in Rorty's definition [ >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironism >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironism> ], and he was that. >> >> But despite all the "models" talk, I would confidently say he was always a >> hardcore materialist. >> >> - pt >> >> Show me one instance, just one, where Vic denied something causal and >> unknown underlying the existence of matter? This is Bruno's model of >> materialism among physicists but it clearly doesn't apply to Vic. AG > > > You might read my favorite book by Vic, which is “The comprehensible cosmos”. > There, it shows something very platonist-like: he shows that physics can be > derived from few principles. > > I don't think seeking a few first principles is particularly Platonic. Thales > thought there were just four elements, and he was way before Plato. AG
Plato did not invent anything indeed. For me, the first platonician was Pythagorus. Plato just sum up well his knowledge/inquiry. Note that Pythagorus too invent nothing, but he was a great traveller and brought back mathematics and metaphysics from its meeting in the East (to simplify a lot, of course). The idea of first principle, studied rather systematically comes with the neopythagoreans and then the neoplatonist. > > > > Unfortunately, he seems to ignore the mind-body problem, > > You can't expect him, or anyone, to solve every outstanding problem. AG No, but he seems to ignore the necessity of solving this to just makes sense to its “comprehensible cosmos”. He uses the identify brain-mind, which does not work with physicalism. > > and so he does not explain how that physical reality can select our > consciousness in way corresponding to what we observe. > > Not a problem; Darwinian evolution. If you apply Darwin also for the origin of the physical laws, from arithmetic. Then it can work. > If our consciousness were disjoint or somehow contradicting what was "out > there", in no time we'd be toast on the trash heap of evolution. AG We have to explain the appearance of primary matter, without assuming it, as this would give it a magical role with respect to digital mechanism. > > So there is still a bit of magic in his explanation, or of lack of rigour (by > not seeing that he uses some non-mechanist theory to allow a physical reality > to do that selection, > > No major AFAICT; just the observation that without POVI, a study of nature > called "physics" couldn't exist. AG > > instead of deducing his first physical principle from arithmetic and > machine’s psychology, as we have to do with mechanism. That is even more > apparent in his less interesting books like “God the paling hypothesis, > (where I agree with the content, but find it bad because he identifies > theology with the current theology which assumes a creator but also a > creation). > > He was trying to debunk the creator theory, so he had to deny any creation. > In fact, I think his favorite origin theory was a non-origin theory. AG > > So Vic approach is still materialist or at least physicalist. But he was on > the right track, and would have understood that his attempt to comprehend the > cosmos was only a beginning: to work well, he would need to derive the cosmos > from machine statistical experience in arithmetic. > > I don't think that possibility ever occurred to him. And note that those who > know his work well, like Brent and Bruce, are not enthusiastic about your > arithmetic theory. AG Every one has the right to dislike possible truth and theories. After 1500 years of Aristotelian brainwashing, the contrary would be astonishing. The point is that the “arithmetic theory” is not a choice. It follows from Mechanism, and it is testable through its consequence, and up to now, the evidences sides with Mechanism and immaterialism, not with materialism (for which there is literally no evidences at all). Bruno > > Bruno > > > > >> >> -- >> 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] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list >> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- 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.
