[ExI] Belief in maths (was mind body dualism)
The Avantguardian
avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 7 20:36:27 UTC 2010
Samantha wrote:
>>Lack of evidence is a perfectly fine reason to not think something is so. If it
>>
>>also has logical inconsistency problems and/or has no explanatory theory that is
>>
>>sufficiently sound then that is more reason to disbelief it.<
What constitutes "evidence" is entirely dependent on an observer's personal
history. If Galileo Galilei and Richard Feynman were to be resurrected into an
empty room, closed off from the rest of the world, Feynman would have a devil of
a time convincing Galileo of the existence of neutrinos. Any theorectical
explanation would have to start from scratch up to and including teaching
Galileo the calculus. Now the philosophical kicker here is the question did
neutrinos exist in Galileo's time? Much of our current reality had no evidence
for its existence for most of human history. And while Galileo might be
epistemologically justified in not believing in neutrinos and black holes, was
he ontologically *right* in doing so?
Stuart LaForge
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through
love."-Carl Sagan
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list