David Nyman wrote:
> Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>
>>So you want an explanation in terms of the "underlying physics" - the physics of the really > real reality. And how will you know when you've found it?
>
>
> It seems to me that comp precisely asserts (and can putatively prove)
> such a 'really real reality' from which observable physics emerges. In
> fact, it demonstrates the necessary relativity between (possibly
> nested) 'sandwiches' of Qualitative Reality and Observable Reality. In
> the comp account, this is responsible for the following jaw-dropping
> implications:
>
> 1) QR (1-person pov) is recursively prior to OR (3-person relata), to
> which it stands in the logical relation of a medium to the symbols
> embodied in it. Consequently, of course, OR cannot *cause* QR, although
> it must correlate with it (hence your observations about neural
> correlates etc.).
But it's still a model, one based on arithmetic rather than matter, and the only way to judge whether it is a good model to see how it corresponds with "mere appearance"; just like we test QM, general relativity, and every other theory. It *might* be the really real model - but so might any other model that fits all the data.
Brent Meeker
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Fri Oct 20 2006 - 19:59:35 PDT