Re: Materialism was:Re: KIM 2.3

2009-01-21 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 20 Jan 2009, at 05:22, Brent Meeker wrote: > > Günther Greindl wrote: > >> >> The question is, why the quantum (as Wheeler, I think, put it)? >> Bruno's >> COMP gives a very elegant _explanation_. > > I agree it is elegant, but whether it can really explain the world > remains to be > se

Re: Materialism was:Re: KIM 2.3

2009-01-21 Thread Günther Greindl
Hi Brent, > I didn't use the term - it is one being attributed to me simply because I > question the adequacy of logic and mathematics to instantiate physics. That is ok - there are different versions of materialism/physicalism etc. > I don't accept any such esoteric theories - I merely entert

Re: Materialism was:Re: KIM 2.3

2009-01-19 Thread Brent Meeker
Günther Greindl wrote: > Brent, > > I wonder, what do you mean with materialism (I ask this having been a > materialist myself)? I didn't use the term - it is one being attributed to me simply because I question the adequacy of logic and mathematics to instantiate physics. > > Physics only d

Materialism was:Re: KIM 2.3

2009-01-19 Thread Günther Greindl
Brent, I wonder, what do you mean with materialism (I ask this having been a materialist myself)? Physics only describes relations. (see for instance here http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/structural-realism/) I gather you accept MWI, so quite a lot of relations hold. The question is, why th