On 5/31/2019 6:37 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2019 at 5:25:07 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 30 May 2019, at 14:32, Philip Thrift <cloud...@gmail.com
<javascript:>> wrote:
On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 5:18:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
You told me that consciousness is material. Please extract it
from the bug, and send me 5g of pure consciousness extract.
I have few doubt that insect and arthropodes have some first
person (conscious) experience, so if consciousness is
material, you should succeed in extracting it from the bug.
Bruno
I'm not a dualist, so there is no /X/ is material and /Y/ is
immaterial (like ghosts) that make up nature.
But a game of bridge is something immaterial, not be confused with
its implementation. I don’t believe in ghost, but I believe in a
tun or immaterial things. Using fictionalism to dismiss the
existence of immaterial thing, like numbers, will make eventually
the whole physical reality, and mathematical reality into fiction,
making the term devoid of meaning.
Bruno
A game a bridge - I suppose as something literally defined with words
and symbols in a book on bridge - can be seen as some sort of
algorithm or (dynamic) mathematical structure even. There are probably
fictional board games in fantasy literature - like Game of Thrones -
which could be taken and tuned into games people could play.
But these are not immaterial from the fictionalist standpoint, just as
one can take the fictional Sherlock Homes in a Arthur Conan Doyle text
and make a stage play to "realize" the characters.
You don't like fictionalism, and you won't like this either, but it is
an interesting alternative.
ttp://phil.elte.hu/leszabo/Preprints/szabo-math_in_physical-v2.pdf
If physicalism is true, everything is physical. In other words,
everything supervenes on, or is necessitated by, the physical.
Accordingly, if there are logical/mathematical facts, they must be
necessitated by the physical facts of the world. The aim of this paper
is to clarify what logical/mathematical facts actually are and how
these facts can be accommodated in a purely physical ontology
Interesting explication of the materialist view of mathematics. I
notice that he didn't directly consider Goedel's idea that arithmetic
has true propositions that can't be proven. I can see that he could
create a hierarchy of formal systems in which the natural numbers would
be another formal system which the semantics of PA refer to. But are
the natural numbers a formal system...or do they have to be formalized
in order to serve as a model?
Brent
No matter how one obscures things, to see things as some being
material and some being immaterial is dualism. There is no way to
wiggle out of that.
@philipthrift
--
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
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/6478ac38-9796-4511-950a-e042885613af%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/6478ac38-9796-4511-950a-e042885613af%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a6538239-fabf-6853-a868-d5bac6f98211%40verizon.net.
