George Levy wrote:
> Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
> >little discussion has
> >been given to the implications of taking the 1st person aspect as primary or
> >fundamental. Could you point me toward any that you have seen?
> >
> >
>
> Hi Stephen
>
> Alas, I am a mere engineer, not a philosopher. The only author I can
> point you to is John Locke who I was told had some view similar to the
> ones I expressed. I have formed my opinions mostly independently in the
> process of writing a book (unpublished :'( ) I think that science is
> moving gradually toward first person - starting with Galileo's
> relativity, then Einstein's relativity and finally with QM (MWI). As
> science had progressed, the observer has acquired a greater and greater
> importance. Extrapolating to the limit, "I" becomes central and its
> existence anthropically defines (creates) the world where it resides.
Science may have moved close to making the observer
central epistemically , but it has not room for the idea
that observers are ontologically fundamental.
Observers are people, homo sapiens, the product of millions
of years of evolution. Scientifically speaking.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 - 10:27:39 PDT