On 19 Aug 2009, at 10:36, Flammarion wrote:
> > > > On 19 Aug, 01:29, David Nyman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Bruno's position is that only one of the above can be true (i.e. CTM >> and PM are incompatible) as shown by UDA-8 (MGA/Olympia). I've also >> argued this, in a somewhat different form. Peter's position I think >> is that 1) and 2) are both false (or in any case that CTM and PM are >> compatible). Hence the validity of UDA-8 - in its strongest form - >> seems central to the current dispute, since it is essentially this >> argument that motivates the appeal to arithmetical realism, the topic >> currently generating so much heat. UDA-8 sets out to be provable or >> disprovable on purely logical grounds. > > >> I for one am unclear on what >> basis it could be attacked as invalid. Can anyone show strong >> grounds >> for this? > > Of course, no argument can validly come to a metaphysical > conclusion-- > in this > case, that matter does not exist --without making a single > metaphysical assumption. I completely agree with that point, but I don't see the relevance. Comp, alias CTM, is an hypothesis in cognitive science/philosophy-of- mind/metaphysics/theology. It is certainly not an hypothesis in mathematics. It relates the preservation of my consciousness through a substitution of my (generalized) brain ( a priori "material"). 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
