Are possible worlds real?
- Thread starter max_freakout
- Start date
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
Tbh, the amount of facepalming I do these days, padding is becoming a must. I am developing a facepalm callous on my hand.
On a small scale, yes.
Ideally his face and your palm.
max_freakout
Nothing matters
merlin wood
mind traveller 3rd class
People like to think there are other worlds, including heaven/paradise, largely because they don't like this one.
max_freakout
Nothing matters
but they might like the others even less
surely other worlds must include ones which are worse than this one as well as those which are more favourable
max_freakout
Nothing matters
ok having read about these i am not convinced that they really prove the existence of other worlds, since they have only been demonstrated at such a limited level
maybe when you can buy a quantum computer at Dell or Evesham i will be convinced
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
OK, we need to be clear if you're asking about parallel universes (i.e. the notion that there are an infinite number of universes and that they are created every time you make a decision), that have physical existance but can never be reached by us in this universe; the bubble/onion type one talked about above which is the basis for Iain M Banks Excession novel, which consists of older/younger universes 'above' and 'below' our own that are continually being created by ongoing Big Bangs and which would theoretically be possble to travel to (which I presume is what's meant by 'Lewis-esque' in the style of Alice, Narnia, Dark Materials etc)
I'm with Mr E's Dad on this one, and that there are infinite parallel universes, where in some I don't exist, in others I'm typing exactly the opposite answer to this etc etc...
I'm with Mr E's Dad on this one, and that there are infinite parallel universes, where in some I don't exist, in others I'm typing exactly the opposite answer to this etc etc...
max_freakout
Nothing matters
i am talking about Lewis-esque possible worlds, and this ^ description is pretty much what i understand by that
except the last part, i dont know if an alternative world is or isnt accesible to us, the main point is simply whether or not it exists
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Hmmm, by 'Lewis-esque' I thought we were talking about C.S Lewis type worlds like Narnia, which can be reached by a variety of means, be it a wardrobe, giant glittering bridge at the North Pole or whatever, not the whole 'infinity of infinities' concept of endlessly diverging realities based on actions taken in...well each one I guess.
max_freakout
Nothing matters
lol we were talking about 2 different Lewis's!
David Lewis, the philosopher, was the motivation for my posting this thread
merlin wood
mind traveller 3rd class
What is needed is a real world with infinite possibilities.
As far as I understand it, in modern philosophy the point of the notion of possible worlds is around in order to make sense of reference based semantics.
The idea of reference-based semantics is that meaning boils down to reference, -- the meaning of dog is everything that is (correctly) referred to by "dog" and the meaning of a proposition is its truth conditions.
This idea runs into problems when you consider some word like "unicorn" which refers to nothing in this world, and yet doesn't mean nothing, nor does it mean the same as centaur which also refers to nothing in this world, -- so philosophers save reference-based semantics by arguing that it refers to unicorns in some possible world. More or less.
I don't know that I buy it really, because in general reference-based semantics seems to presuppose some kind of realism that I find unconvincing.
As far as I know the philosophical construct of possible worlds doesn't have a lot to do with possible worlds as in the movie above. Though I must say I find the idea of God rewinding to edit random events, slightly far-fetched. If there are multiple realities I guess they only arise at significant choice points.
The idea of reference-based semantics is that meaning boils down to reference, -- the meaning of dog is everything that is (correctly) referred to by "dog" and the meaning of a proposition is its truth conditions.
This idea runs into problems when you consider some word like "unicorn" which refers to nothing in this world, and yet doesn't mean nothing, nor does it mean the same as centaur which also refers to nothing in this world, -- so philosophers save reference-based semantics by arguing that it refers to unicorns in some possible world. More or less.
I don't know that I buy it really, because in general reference-based semantics seems to presuppose some kind of realism that I find unconvincing.
As far as I know the philosophical construct of possible worlds doesn't have a lot to do with possible worlds as in the movie above. Though I must say I find the idea of God rewinding to edit random events, slightly far-fetched. If there are multiple realities I guess they only arise at significant choice points.
i-am-your-idea
pretty vacant
merlin wood
mind traveller 3rd class
unicorns are real in this world, as real as anything else. how real do you want?
Well, in a way I suppose...
Similar threads
