From: Marc Geddes (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Mar 05 2004 - 01:32:55 MST
>### As a non-foundationalist I will of course agree
>with you, there is no
>implicit "ethics of the cosmos", and volitional
>morality doesn't aspire to
As a Bayesian Foundationalist I have to disagree with
you of course. After a little bit of additional study
in philosophy I found out that although Aristotlean
Foudationalism is incompatible with Bayes, there are
weaker forms of Foundationalism that ARE compatible
with Bayes. Even accepting Bayes (which I now do) you
can still have self-justifying (Foundationalist)
beliefs, you just have to give up the idea that you
can be certain of them.
If we define 'a morality' to mean 'a goal system', and
then observe that the goal system of the universe is
'the laws of physics', aren't 'the laws of physics'
equivalent to 'the ethics of the cosmos'?
Please visit my web-site at: http://www.prometheuscrack.com
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:46 MDT