= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanArmak comments on [Poll] Less Wrong and Mainstream Philosophy: How Different are We? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (627)
Leaving aside any putative True Theory of Everything which we don't know yet, the laws we actually know and use today are definitely Humean. We should know, we made them that way.
I assumed the question was referring to the fundamental laws of the universe, which would be a theory of everything.
A true theory of everything is by definition never wrong. In which case there's no observable difference between Humeanism and non-Humeanism, and it makes no sense to talk about the theory "determining" events or merely "describing" them.
Define: theory of everything: maximally compressed, true and complete description of the physical evolution of the universe over time.
This was a point of some confusion to me. But "The laws of nature" to me means the fundamental laws of the universe, not the models we come up with. I dismissed my confusion as "oh, this must be another obnoxious thing that mainstream philosophy thinks."
And “determine” too.