On 2/29/2020 1:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Feb 2020, at 03:45, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2/28/2020 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Feb 2020, at 13:05, Philip Thrift <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Only Platonists jump to a belief that there is a ghostly world of
abstract entities called "numbers" that exists outside of matter
(whether that matter is your brain or your computer).
We don’t need this either. We need only to believe that 2+3 = 5, or
that phi_i(j) converges or not converges. The philosophy and
metaphysics come after.
If not, it is like studying the working of my brain to convince
myself that I understand correctly that 2+2=4. That does not work,
because my brain study is based on my belief that 2+2=4.
You could aswel say that Einstein’s theory is circular, because you
want to explain 2+2=4 with Matter, but Einstein’s theory use the
numbers, and assumes they do what they need to give sense to, say,
E= mc^2.
At some point, people have to put *all* the hypothesis on the table,
so that it is clear what is assumed, and what is derived.
That doesn't really help because it leaves open the relation between
what is assumed to be true and what is actually. That's why
reasoning that is not grounded in ostensive definitions and
empirically tested is just a game.
Accepting the Aristotelian credo, but I have never found one empirical
or theoretical evidence for it,
You just refuse to see it. It's all around you. The evidence is that
it works.
and then with Mechanism we know, or should know, that it does not make
sense. Physicalism + mechanism gives magical power to “matter” by
enabling it to prevent a Turing machine, 100% similar to you at the
relevant description level, to be conscious. This raise the question
if some holy water is not also needed, or the will of some
supernatural creature …
Ostensive definition works very well, but not in computationalist
metaphysics, as ostension happens in dreams, and thus in arithmetic.
Physics is the science of measuring the relative plausibility of
computations/dreams, and computer science, predicts quickly the many
worlds, and the (propositional) quantum formalism, where materialism
must still eliminate or dismiss consciousness and the mind-body problem.
Even in philosophizing about consciousness you rely on ostensive
definition: when you write about "seeing red" or "counting" as conscious
activities you are relying on and assuming that it points to what it
brings to mind in your reader.
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/6c157082-c914-1791-7a01-3ed156f715be%40verizon.net.
