On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 at 5:36:54 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 9 Sep 2019, at 13:07, PGC <multipl...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 1:48:41 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> Let us discuss ideas, and if you disagree with one thing I say, it would >> be nice to explain what. >> > > Why? So you can dismiss it until a Stanford entry is written for you to > dismiss with the infamous correct scientific attitude we see advertised > here in recent months? There are dozens of ways to refute the premisses > of not one but many things you say. Assuming an albeit countable infinity > of transcendental objects/properties ontologically, while accusing > "physicalists" for assuming infinities maliciously for years… > > > That contradicts directly my premise, which are YD and CT. On the > contrary, I have insisted many times that analysis and physics are in the > derived phenomenology of the universal machine. I do not assume anything > more than what is needed to prove the existence of the computations. >
Nobody denies the existence of abstractions. Their reality remains a matter of personal speculation/mysticism. Therefore branding people as "physicalists" for not entertaining particular personal speculation includes a blame quality that isn't supported by evidence. It is aggressive, Christian-like, and its merit in scientific terms is dubious. > > Which is it by the way? Do they assume such because a) they are evil or > because b) they are stupid/naive? Or is it a superposition? > > > Physicalist have to assume some magical things to explain how some > computations are “more real” or “the only one able to make a computation > supporting consciousness”. > You're trying to escape the question. If the amount of magic is a measure here, then why are the alleged physicalists wrong in some hard definite sense? Because of incompatibility? Peano arithmetic is powerful and entails unsolvable phenomena that could be argued to be just as magical/red flags for a coherent ontology; i.e. including phenomena not amenable to explanation and therefore just as magical. Arithmetic is incompatible with itself in the sense that "mechanism" is hardly as clear a concept as would be suggested by the type of usage on this list; i.e. hiding unsolvable attributes that make it much less clear than "2+2=4" would have readers assume, which is more of a rhetorical move than an argument. > But then, it has to be non Turing emulable, because, if it is, it is > already emulated an infinity of times in arithmetic. That can be proved in > Peano arithmetic, which, typically, do not assume the axiom of infinity, > like Euclid proves correctly the existence of an infinity of prime numbers, > without assuming any infinity in the theory. > Maybe the confusion is here: proving that there are infinitely many things > can be done without assuming an infinity. It lies enough to prove the > existence of some order, and to prove that for each x we can find something > “bigger” than x for that order. > Nah, it's the double standard of assuming folks to be naive while living with arithmetic's considerable unsolvable/magical issues. Imagine everybody receives the perfect education concerning these issues: what merit would arise? A sense of perfect humility and some more precise appraisal of why nothing can be explained? A non-explanation with the pretense of explanation. Do nothing to not be false, thus we my never be false but with the bar so low, we'll never be able to enjoy anything either, as joy entails at least some degree of surprise/indeterminacy and loss of control. There's a cynical, controlling quality in this discourse that has enforces the christian style blame discourses. PGC -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a961178c-608f-423a-9d4b-54c6aa244ca1%40googlegroups.com.
