Nancy Cartwright has argued that there are no fundamental laws as such. Only phenomenological/ constitutive
-
-
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
“All laws are contingent” is probably my minimalist Hume++ epistemology. But inventions can be absolute. Therefore engineers are higher status than mathematicians or scientists. QED This is Rao’s law and theorem
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
“Laws are contingent, inventions are absolute” is a great argument for asking “how can we do x” by default rather than “can we do x”
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @harmonylion1 @vgr and
That’s cute, but ontologically incoherent. Reality decides, in every moment, what subsequent state of reality is “invented” The laws of physics aren’t immutable, but that doesn’t make them contingent. As formula: “Time is real. The present is contingent. Causation is fundamental”
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hyperauxetic @vgr and
Should be fine considering I seriously doubt causation is fundamental. More “laws are contingent”
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @harmonylion1 @hyperauxetic and
The most conservative position I’ve been able to define is that events, change, and perspectives are real. All else is Trumpism. Causation isn’t a well posed idea once you go quantum. Only entanglements rippling across perspectives.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr @harmonylion1 and
I have a selfish interest in identifying and adopting the most conservative view of what’s real because my project is to maximize the canvas for structured solipsism
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
“That which does not go away when I stop believing in it” — PKD is actually very solid. The real is that which resists complete solipsism.
-
-
Replying to @vgr @hyperauxetic and
Yes but what level of non-belief does something have to tolerate — if I stop believing in cars I can still be hit by them, but that doesn’t make cars fundamental, nor the atoms they’re made of
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @harmonylion1 @hyperauxetic and
I have several thousand draft words on that very question. It’s the exact right starting point for defining temporality, escapism, etc. Think in terms of the half-life of delusions and you go down a very deep rabbit hole.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.