Re: Dreaming On

From: Flammarion <>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 05:08:52 -0700 (PDT)

On 1 Sep, 12:26, David Nyman <> wrote:
> 2009/9/1 Flammarion <>:
> >> Peter, you need to keep firmly in mind that the superfluity of PM
> >> follows on the *assumption* of CTM. The razor is then applied on the
> >> basis of that assumption. If you prefer a theory of mind based on
> >> "real reality", fair enough, but then you must face the conclusion
> >> that CTM is no longer tenable in that role.
> > No, none of that follows from CTM alone. Bruno is putting
> > forward the Sceptical Hypothesis that I am being simulated
> > on a UD. However, if I am entiteld to assign a very low
> > likelihood to that SH along with all the many others, alowing me
> > to know in a good-enough way that matter is real, reality is
> > real etc. It is very important in these arguments to distinguish
> > between certain knowledge and good-enough knowledge.
> Well, the either the Olympia/MGA reductios entail this consequence, or
> they don't. You imply that they don't, but you still haven't put
> forward a clear refutation in a fully explicit form that could be
> considered here on its merits.

No-one's put forward a clear statement of it either.

> Until you can do this, it isn't a
> question of certain or good-enough knowledge, but rather about the
> logical entailment of CTM itself.

It's about both. It can have entail possibilities that
are very unlikely.

> This is an extremely non-trivial
> point: the burden of the argument is that CTM entails a reversal in
> world-view; it is fundamentally incompatible with a materialist
> metaphysics.
> > BTW--why doens't O's R cut away Platonia in favour of
> > a smaller material universe?
> That is a tenable view. But not with the simultaneous assumption of
> CTM.


>That is the point. I should say that my starting position
> before encountering Bruno's views was against the tenability of CTM on
> the basis of any consistent notion of physical process. Bruno hasn't
> yet persuaded me that an explicitly non-computational theory of mind
> on some such basis is actually untenable. But he has awakened me to
> the reverse realisation that a non-materialist world-view can tenably
> be founded on CTM

coupled with Platonism.

> David
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Tue Sep 01 2009 - 05:08:52 PDT

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