On Friday, June 26, 2020 at 1:37:31 AM UTC-5 Bruno Marchal wrote:
> > > On 26 Jun 2020, at 00:32, Philip Thrift <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > There isn't much more that's been said about the (underdeterminative) > nature of theories beyond what Duhem, Quine said decades ago. > > Quine is a materialist? He said this in the frame of Aristotle philosophy. > He missed the fact that incompleteness makes some “essence” back in > science, like the greeks saw much earlier. So, Quine explanation can’t work > when we assume Descartes, Darwin, etc. He needs a non mechanical mind, > which, BTW, re-introduced some “essence” too, in metaphysics (where the > essence are the most troubling, I would say). > > Bruno > > > Duhem-Quine has nothing to do with what is fundamentally "underneath" > scientific theories -- it could be *matter, minds, numbers, angels, > devils, ... *. > It has to do with the mathematical-linguistic aspects of scientific > theories themselves and how they are merely *guides* to reality and not > its *scriptures*. @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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1396bd54-edff-4fac-8460-79b15fa535ean%40googlegroups.com.
