Le 05-oct.-06, à 16:03, Lennart Nilsson a écrit :
>
> Only atheist have reason to dislike the consequence of comp. Not
> because they would be wrong, but because their belief in "nature" is
> shown to need an act of faith (and atheists hate the very notion of
> faith).
>
> Bruno
>
> That is the most absurd statement so far…
Unless you are confusing atheism and agnosticism, or ... you should
explain why you find this absurd. the UDA precisely illustrates that
the "modest scientist" should not take "nature" for granted. Of course
by nature, I mean the aristotelian conception of nature as something
primitive, i.e. which is at the root of everything else. This does not
necessarily jeopardize the actual *theories* of nature, just the
interpretation of those theories. This is a good thing given that
physicists today admit there is no unanimity on the interpretation of
physical theories.
And I argue since that if we assume comp physics cannot be the
fundamental science, it has to be derive from psychology, biology,
theology, number theory, computer science, well chose your favorite
name, they are all imprecise enough.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Thu Oct 05 2006 - 11:07:18 PDT