Le 09-juil.-06, à 17:15, Lennart Nilsson a écrit :
> I really think that we should infer both the substantial world and the
> numerical world from the middleground so to speak, from our
> observations.
But why should we infer a substantial world? Substantial or primary or
primitive matter is an incredible metaphysical extrapolation. I still
want to (re)study why Aristotle made that step, except as a tool for
burying the mind-body problem.
Sade is very clear on the role of matter and why linking consciousness
to it: to make people believed their act have few personal
consequences. La Mettrie also begin the celbnrate "materialist"
dissolution of the first person, including its responsibility feelings.
The modern materialist have to be a first person eliminativist.
I doubt less about consciousness and the number 317 than about *stuffy*
strings or waves, which are not even assumed in physical theories,
except in the background for separating conceptual issues from
practice.
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Mon Jul 10 2006 - 08:35:29 PDT