On 3/10/2019 6:45 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 9 Mar 2019, at 01:16, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> wrote:
On 3/8/2019 2:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Why is the probability not 1.0. Why is there any effect at all in any
continuation? Why is experience dependent on physics, if it is just a matter
of timeless arithmetical relations.
Because to get physics you need to be able to make prediction.
But why do you need to "get physics". You seem to be arguing
backwards from the conclusion you want. You know you need to get
physics to make a prediction, otherwise your theory is useless. So
then you argue that therefore substituting for brain parts is
necessary because that makes "getting physics" necessary.
I don’t understand. What do you mean by “substituting brain parts is
necessary”. It is my working hypothesis.
But then you reach a contradiction that brain parts don't exist and are
irrelevant to thought.
It is the exactly same hypothesis made by Darwin, and most scientists
since. That physics has to be recovered from arithmetic is shown to be
a consequence of that theory. And the proofs I have given is
constructive, so it explains how to recover physics from arithmetic.
Most of the weirdness of quantum physics becomes indisputable
arithmetic facts. In fact, the classical, or quasi classical part of
physics is far more difficult to be derived, but it has still to be
derivable, unless Mechanism is false (in which case we are back at the
start).
Keep in mind that with Mechanism, physicalism is already refuted.
A tautology: With Communism, capitalism is already refuted.
With physicalism, you need a god to select a computation, or a
collection of computation, to make a prediction. But if that God
exists, you cannot say that you survive a digital substitution of the
brain *qua computation”. You can still say yes to a doctor, invoking
the strangest magical abilities of your god or another.
If you doubt this, just tell me how A Nature, or a Primary Matter, or
any God, select the computation which all occurs, are executed in the
(sigma_1) arithmetical reality.
If you argue that the computation in arithmetic are not real, you
again invoke your god. The word “real” has to be avoid in science,
especially in theology when done with the scientific method.
But you invoke your god to justify your argument for your god: /In fact,
the classical, or quasi classical part of physics is far more difficult
to be derived, but it has still to be derivable, *unless Mechanism is
false* (in which case we are back at the start).
/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.
