Bruno, before we get phased out: you quoted Russell:
"> >I raised this very issue in "Why Occams Razor", and came to the
> >conclusion that the only satisfactory "interpreter" is the observer
> >itself"
then you write very smart thoughts (like: "> Modelising near possibilities
by consistent extensions (UD accessible) etc.<"
all, including Occam, reducing the concept of 'all' into the segment we can
stuff into our mind. Our limited capabilities are not limiting nature (or
call it whatever), we just don't comprehend/observe the rest of it. Not even
the 'logically possible' part of it.
Our way of talking is not too humble, I can say modestly.
John Mikes
<jamikes.domain.name.hidden>
"
http://pages.prodigy.net/jamikes"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marchal" <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
To: <Fabric-of-Reality.domain.name.hidden>; <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: Logically possible universes and Occam's razor
S N I P
Received on Fri Aug 31 2001 - 12:09:09 PDT