Re: Fw: Something for Platonists

From: James N Rose <integrity.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:33:00 -0700

Joao,

:-) of course Plato wasn't aware of QM,
but, he was also unaware of the importance
that -mechanism- -real communication involvements-
are resident in any information relation situation,
as would be that which connects the Ideal and Real
and gives validation/meaning to any correspondences
cited or citable.

The 'ideal' as posited - and presumptively relied
upon by many post facto - is so separated from
'being' and the encounters through which both
being and knowing are instantiated, that it
would not be unreasonable to populate 'ideal'
with all sorts of non-possible existentials.

You can't tie 'ideal' to the spectrum of alternative
but satisfactory exemplars, and also say there
are no requisite relational aspects of the
properties or qualia resident in the different
domains.

Otherwise, you state:

"The Platonic World only contains true mathematical
statements, not all the variety that you seem to
believe it requires. In other words it contains
presummably less information than most textbooks
of mathematics which include unproved conjectures etc..."

So the platonic world cannot/doesnot contain the
ideal called 'unproved/unprovable conjectures"?

The Platonic World contains -less- information
than the instantiated world? Exactly how far
can you extend that argument?..to the point
that it contains -no- information of relevance?

It seems that the Platonic World, as intriguing
and frame-of-reference shifting as it may be --
getting people to perceive beyond the immediacy
of encounters and the presumptions of observation --
is as flighty and weak as the 'real world' it decries.

You hold to it because it infers an eternality that
is very appealing, an opiate to the fear of oblivion
and total absolute negation of meaning concurrent that
comes with complete non-existence (even as potentia).

I place it on no such special pedestal. It is not
a holy ineffible. If it can't be correlated with
being, then there is empty value, use or meaning in
presumptively claiming there is - and yet - denying
processive ways of having such 'correlations'.

I deduce that platonic notions are nice sophomoric
ramblings, some interesting relations are enunciated,
but in the long run there are more important realite's.

James
Received on Mon Jun 16 2003 - 15:34:16 PDT