On 05 Feb 2013, at 08:16, Kim Jones wrote:
http://io9.com/5981472/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-universe-here-is-one-possible-answer
OK - so rip into it and say why it's all nonsense.
It is full of sense, but a bit trivial, and then he uses implicitly
comp, but fail to generalize its approach, and to see it makes non
trivial sense from that point. I am afraid it makes also his view more
complex by trying to avoid the MWI, which of course makes it still
more far from comp. Like many physicists, he avoids the mind body
problem. It is still a form of Aristotelianism, which, I argue, is not
compatible with the comp hyp in the cognitive science. But somehow, it
is less wrong than many others, if we abstract from what has to be
revised in the light of comp.
Bruno
Kim Jones
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
