>
>Curtiss Leung wrote:
>
>> Hi Ted:
>>
>> > Even if you write it down on a piece of paper,
>> > an equation is still ideal and eternal, and this is
>> > what's supposedly governing matter.
>
>This is called Platonism, and it is with that term that Bertrand
>Russell labelled himself as a mathematician. But of course
>laws, equations, theorems, etc. exist only in human brains.
>There is no e = mc(2) "out there" in the world, though
>matter moves in ways that can be described (for human
>understanding) by that equation.
I agree, except that you're not taking it far enough. Yes, equations do not
exist "out there" in the world, but that includes human brains. If
equations could exist in human brains, then what's to stop them from
existing on pieces of paper? In other words, you're still taking these
things at face value, which means you're conceding that they're eternal and
ideal. We must never give an inch to Plato! Equations have no
self-existence. They do not exist on paper or in brains. They are abstract
and exist only to the extent that we imagine them. You only *imagine* that
the equation is written down on the piece of paper. In fact, when you look
at the paper, what your eye sees is just bits of ink. It's the *mind*, not
the eye, that "sees" the equation. In reality, the equation does not exist
except in your mind.
>
>The odd belief that scientific laws (as opposed to what those
>laws describe) have an independent reality is just a modern
>version of Plato's forms.
Exactly. The Platonism of modern science is what I was getting at. The quote above is lifted out of context. However, I should have been more clear. The confusion here is really my fault, not Curtiss Leung's. It just didn't occur to me that anyone would think I was a Platonist.
>Ted's belief in this perhaps indicates
>the source of his odd beliefs about "minds."
No. My conception of mentality stems from my belief in the existence of memory, not ideal forms. Modern science rejects the idea of memory. Instead of recalling things from the past, we simply store the information regarding past events. Thus memory is replaced by information retrieval.
Carrol, you claim that matter moves in ways that can be described by equations. But why would matter move according to "laws" of physics, unless those laws exist in the actual world? Instead of rejecting human memory, we must extend it to reality as a whole. The only alternative to Platonism is to universalize memory. Not only does memory exist in the mind, but memory is fundamental to nature. There are no laws of physics. There are only habits. The patterns of motion in matter were not given prior to the existence of the universe. They had to have been established very early in the history of the universe and then remembered ever since.
Eternity or memory. Take your pick.
Ted