Le 07-août-06, à 18:24, 1Z a écrit :
> Because you don't believe in empriricism, but that is all rather > circular. Who said I am not an empiricist? OK. I am saying that "fundamental truth (including the origin of the "universe")" is in our head (like mystics). But then I make this precise with comp: grosso modo, I am saying that "fundamental truth is in the head of any self-referentially correct machine (also called Lobian machine)". I explain (through the UD Argument) why physics is there too. I explain (through the interview of the lobian machine) how to extract physics from the "head of a machine". But I conclude from this only that comp is testable: extract physics from the head of the machine and then compare with empirical physics. If nature contradicts the comp theory, I would abandon the comp theory, I would not conclude that nature is faulty, just that nature gives evidence that comp is wrong. Of course, if comp is correct (and if my reasoning is not faulty) then I show that mysticism (and especially rational mysticism (like one millennium of greek theology)) is correct, and that truth indeed is in our head, but I am open that comp will appear to be wrong in front of empirical knowledge. 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@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
