Re: The Meaning of Life

From: Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:34:47 +0100

Le 13-mars-07, à 05:03, Brent Meeker a écrit :

> But there is no reason to believe there is any "root" cause that is
> deeper than variation with natural selection. You have not presented
> any argument for the existence of this "ultimate" or "root". You
> merely refer to "closed science" as though that proved something - but
> it begs the question. You have to show there is something outside
> science in order to know that it is "closed"; not just that there is
> something science has not explained, there's lots of that, but
> something that science cannot, in-principle explain.


Assuming comp, we can know that science will never been able to explain
where natural numbers come from. That's an insoluble mystery.
It makes science open. Forever.

But then comp *can* explain (but does not yet provide more than an
embryo of explanation, yet already confirmed) where waves and particles
come from, and also, unlike physics, why waves and particles can hurt
(cf G/G*).

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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Thu Mar 15 2007 - 10:42:49 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:13 PST