[MD] The Edge 2006 Annual Question

[ian glendinning]

Aaaaggghhh!!! Scott,

Can I take us back up a level and make some "meta-points".

We agree already.

(1) Last point first, you said
"I wouldn't call it physicalism ... I don't like to call xxxx or yyyy a zzzz "

Physicalism is just the name I / we have chose for "my metaphysics".
Please don't infer any historical baggage in that word. By that
defintion physics = (the best model of) reality. That's all
physicalism means. (I've already said a hundred times, when I use that
word, I have Pirsigian Quality at it's root / base.)

As I said several months ago, our debate is 100% linguistic.

(2) You said
"You are confusing Occam's Razor with less challenging to one's
metaphoric system".

I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm deliberately choosing to use that
metaphor. We'd already agreed (you more emphatically than I) that it's
ALL metaphors. Even the metaphysics (religion) of science, implicit in
my "physicalism", as well as the semiosis and consciousness in yours.
How much more metaphorical than Occam's Razor can one get ?!?!

(3) You also said
"salvationally speaking .... I want to counter the preaching of
Dennett and his ilk"

'Nuff said. Now we know your real aims. Such a pity.

Ian
PS "It often does more harm than good to force definitions on things
we don't understand. Only in logic and mathematics do definitions ever
capture concepts perfectly. The things we deal with in practical life
are usually too complicated to be represented by neat, compact
expressions ... One must not mistake defining things for knowing what
they are."  Marvin Minsky - The Society of Mind - 1985