On Sunday, October 27, 2019 at 5:02:14 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Oct 2019, at 23:08, Philip Thrift <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > "[Physical science] was designed to give mathematical models that can > accurately predict the behavior of matter, and that's gone really well, but > it was never designed to deal with the subjective qualities of > consciousness." (@Philip_Goff) > https://edge.org/conversation/philip_goff-a-post-galilean-paradigm > > > Yes. Physical science was not designed to talk about (Plato’s) ideas, only > Aristotle matter. That is why it has never got the vocation of a theory of > everything, unlike metaphysics and theology. > > But physicalist makes physics into a theology, which might make sense, but > not if we assume that the brain is Turing emulable in a way relevant for > getting a conscious person. That is not obvious, but result for the UDA. > (Universal Dovetailer Argument or Paradox). > > Bruno > > > As I have suggested, it is not about Plato and Aristotle, but Epicurus and Thales:
Epicurus: An atomism of physical and psychical "atoms". Thales: Aristotle got his "matter" idea from him. @phioipthrift -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/032c5db3-9eef-4d0c-8ed2-761465981c6e%40googlegroups.com.
