[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 29, 4:20 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks for spelling it out.
>
>>> (1) Mathematical concepts are indispensible to our explanations of
>>> reality.
>> So are grammatical concepts.
>
> No they aren't. Grammatical concepts are human cr
On Aug 29, 4:03 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> There is this special quality of subjective experience: that which is
> >> left over after all the objective (third person knowable) information
> >> is accounted for. Nevertheless, the subjective experience can be
> >> perfectly
On Aug 29, 4:20 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for spelling it out.
>
> > (1) Mathematical concepts are indispensible to our explanations of
> > reality.
>
> So are grammatical concepts.
No they aren't. Grammatical concepts are human creations, which is
precisely shown b
On 28/08/07, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> If you drop a pen, to
> >> compute EXACTLY what will happen in principle, you have to consider
> >> all
> >> comp histories in UD* (the complete development of the UD) going
> >> through your actual state (the higher level description of
Thanks for spelling it out.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 28, 5:18 am, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I don't find your arguments at all convincing. In fact I don't think you've
>> even given an argument - just assertions.
>
>
> Here the points of a clear-cut argumen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 28, 12:53 am, "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 27/08/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
I accept that there is more than one way to describe reality, and I
accept the concept of supervenience, but
Le 27-août-07, à 13:27, David Nyman a écrit :
>
> On 16/08/07, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> If you drop a pen, to
>> compute EXACTLY what will happen in principle, you have to consider
>> all
>> comp histories in UD* (the complete development of the UD) going
>> through your ac
On 28/08/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What if someone simply claimed that they couldn't see how circulation
> > was the same as cardiovascular activity: they could understand that
> > the heart was a pump, the blood a fluid, the blood vessels conduits,
> > but the circulat
On 28/08/07, David Nyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What if someone simply claimed that they couldn't see how circulation
> > was the same as cardiovascular activity: they could understand that
> > the heart was a pump, the blood a fluid, the blood vessels conduits,
> > but the circulatory sy
On Aug 28, 6:31 pm, "Torgny Tholerus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev:
>
>
>
> > (7) From (3) mathematical concepts are objectively real. But there
> > exist mathematical concepts (inifinite sets) which cannot be explained
> > in terms of finite physical processes.
>
> How
10 matches
Mail list logo
