Re: Why Objective Values Exist

2007-08-29 Thread marc . geddes
On Aug 29, 1:10 pm, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So are mathematics human creations (c.f. William S. Cooper, "The Evolution of > Logic"). There is no sharp distinction between what is expressed in words > and what is expressed in mathematical symbols. Darwins theory of evolut

Re: Why Objective Values Exist

2007-08-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
Le 29-août-07, à 02:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > I *don't* think that mathematical > properties are properties of our *descriptions* of the things. I > think they are properties *of the thing itself*. I agree with you. If you identify "mathematical theories" with "descriptions", then th

Re: Why Objective Values Exist

2007-08-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
Le 29-août-07, à 12:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > Any scientific theory (including Darwin's) *is* more accurate when > expressed in mathematical notation. You *can* draw a clear > distinction between the language used to express mathematical concepts > and the concept itself. OK. > Pure

Re: Observer Moment = Sigma1-Sentences

2007-08-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
Le 28-août-07, à 18:26, David Nyman a écrit : > > 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 throug

Re: Why Objective Values Exist

2007-08-29 Thread Brent Meeker
Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Le 29-août-07, à 02:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > >> I *don't* think that mathematical >> properties are properties of our *descriptions* of the things. I >> think they are properties *of the thing itself*. > > > I agree with you. If you identify "mathematical the