Bruno Marchal writes:
>(*) Well, I'm certainly interested in that naming issue, and perhaps I
>could ask you right now what expression do you find the less shocking:
>"Physics is derivable from machine psychology", or
>"Physics is derivable from machine theology" ?
>'course, you can put "computer science" or "number theory" instead of
>machine psycho or theology, but then the reference to a soul or a person is
>eliminated, and giving the current tendency of many scientist to just
>eliminate the person from the possible object of rational inquiry, I prefer
>to avoid it. Note that in "conscience and mechanism" I have used the
>expression "theology", and in "computability, physics and cognition", I
>have been asked to use "psychology" instead. I find "theology" much more
>correct and honest, but then I realise (empirically) that it it could seem
>too much shocking for some people (especially the atheist). What do you
>think?
>I have already avoid "metaphysics" because it is confusing in the
>metamathematical (Godelian) context, and also I'm in a country where the
>word "metaphysics" already means "crackpot". Does the word "theology" means
>"crackpot" in some country ? I don't think so, but please tell me if you
>know about such practice.
My opinion is that "theology" would create at least as a bad an impression
as "metaphysics" in the English-speaking world, if the intended audience is
philosophers or scientists. "Psychology" is a more neutral and acceptable
word.
That's the easy part of your post to answer. The modal logic problems will
need more than a few spare moments at work...
Stathis Papaioannou
_________________________________________________________________
realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property
http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au
Received on Thu Dec 22 2005 - 23:25:34 PST