Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 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.
It is a modest metaphysical posit which can be used to explain
a variety of observed phenomena, ranging from Time and Change
to the observed absence of Harry Potter universes.
> I still
> want to (re)study why Aristotle made that step, except as a tool for
> burying the mind-body problem.
As opposed to the mind-mathematics 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.
Stuffiness explains why the only one logical possibility is real.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 - 10:04:49 PDT