Xref: utzoo sci.misc:1107 talk.philosophy.misc:937
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!pyramid!thirdi!sarge
From: sarge@thirdi.UUCP (Sarge Gerbode)
Newsgroups: sci.misc,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: The nature of reality.
Message-ID: <364@thirdi.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 88 07:49:58 GMT
References: <343@thirdi.UUCP> <732@actnyc.UUCP> <356@thirdi.UUCP> <27440@linus.UUCP> <363@thirdi.UUCP> <984@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu>
Reply-To: sarge@thirdi.UUCP (Sarge Gerbode)
Organization: Institute for Research in Metapsychology
Lines: 24
Keywords: reality credibility validity
Summary: If the map is unreal, we've had it.

In article <984@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> vu0112@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu
(Cliff Joslyn) writes:

>So reality of the territory is undecidable.  What about reality of the
>map? Sarge, I think you'd claim that an individual's truth claims about
>their mental phenomena are incorrigible.  When I was reading in
>Cognitive Science I did come accross some pretty heavy arguments against
>this view.

>So, what if reality of the map is *also* undecidable?  Well, then, uh, I
>guess. . .gosh, I'd better be pretty careful going to work today. .
>.never know when I met run into a reality pit and spit out a white hole.

If reality of the map is undecidable, then, as you imply, we are really
f**ked.  We can't go on living with that assumption, so, in practice, it's
unmakable.  And I don't think anyone would really agree that they couldn't have
a *representation* of reality, at least.
-- 
"Absolute knowledge means never having to change your mind."

Sarge Gerbode
Institute for Research in Metapsychology
950 Guinda St.
Palo Alto, CA 94301
UUCP:  pyramid!thirdi!sarge