From: Simon Gordon (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Apr 26 2003 - 16:29:15 MDT
--- Ben Goertzel <email@example.com> wrote: >
> OK, if you are saying these other universes "exist"
> as abstractions, that's
Not only am i saying that other universes exist as
abstractions; i am also saying that our universe
belongs to this set of abstractions - in terms of
existance our universe is equal in status to the other
universes and that is why you cannot deny the
existance of these other universes. It also happens to
be the reason why our universe necessarily exists
precisely because it is an abstraction and
abstractions have the property of necessary existance.
This is widely accepted among philosophers, at least
for the necessary existance of mathematics and by
corollary the necessary existance also of mathematical
"the unreasable effectiveness of mathematics in the
physical universe"? The physical universe *is* a
mathematical structure so there are no problems here.
The best part about accepting my ontology is not its
self-consistency but the fact that you get to see why
our universe exists! You are nolonger haunted by the
possibility of it not existing.
For a better Internet experience
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:42 MDT