| Re: Wittgenstein on the Metaphysical Self |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: Rec RoomRec Room Date: Sep 13, 2008 07:54
andy-k wrote:
>Your point that "not all particles would disappear
> simultaneously" and so "the whole cosmos would not
> be winking in and out of existence" is a fair
> portrayal of my view on this issue. I regard "the
> whole cosmos" as the over-arching process that
> conceptually divides into sub-processes, some of
> which change so rapidly as to manifest as
> discontinuities. It's not yet clear to me why this
> fails as a viable alternative to the idea of a
> discontinuously unfolding "whole cosmos".
Can the developments be conceived as a single over-arching process when
the evolution of a universe consists of countless nonsynchronous steps?
I guess classification, then, is the actual gist of the matter. For me,
an "over-arching process" would be one where all the changes are unified
by happening simultaneously, in a sequence of universal steps / nows.
But since both methods feature discontinuity in a different way, it's
really not a key factor for such judgements. Your original question
"What, in your view, is gained by this introduction of discontinuity?"
led me to mistakenly believe this concerned discontinuity itself.
(Apologies if this post repeats multiple times. The service kept stating
that it could not send because of technical difficulties, but you never
know until later if that was literally the case).
posted by Ecce
| 
