Talk:Digital philosophy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (major fields): Philosophy of mind

Contents 1 needs categories 2 ! 3 needs categories 4 Multism 5 Other 6 Clarification

[edit] needs categories

This page lists William Gibson and Charles Moffat as digital philosophers - William Gibson is primarily a Novelist, and Charles Moffat is an artist. On each of their wikipedia articles, there is no mention of their positions as philosophers. I'm sure both are interested in philosophy - but have they written any books on the subject? Have they any degrees in philosophy? Are they considered by other well known philosophers to be philosophers? It takes more than an interest in philosophy to call one's self a philosopher.

I'm deleting Gibson from the "Digital Philosophers" section, because there isn't anything saying that he is a bona fide philosopher, and he has never called him self a "digital philosopher". Besides, his books don't necessarily deal with the form of "digital philosophy" discussed in this article.

Ill leave Moffat, since at least he mentioned Digital Philosophy in his book, but really I don't think his stuff has anything to do with what the article is about.

68.193.53.233 01:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] !

	Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.
Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify its strengths and weaknesses.

I'd be interested in any relationship to Spinozism (based on my idea that "bits" might be akin to Spinoza's "substance").

Also it should mention it that it is Deterministic (right?).--Ben 09:26, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] needs categories

Like the header says, this article needs categories. I'd add them, but I'm not sure which ones would be appropriate.--Kross^Talk 18:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multism

This is not a notable development in metaphysics, and seems to be old wine in a new bottle anyway The idea that a single substance can have many manifestations and properties is not novel. 1Z 15:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other

This page should be merged with Digital physics page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nufe (talk • contribs) 14:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification

I found this article from The Matrix category box. However I have skimmed through the article several times and I can't understand a thing. I can't understand its relationship to the concept of the Matrix series, not what are digital physics, cellular automata or multism, and I can't bother reading the full articles of irrelevant information, only to understand what 'digitalism' is.

So I humbly ask from any knower to try to improve and simplify the article. Put an understandable and secularized introduction in the beginning before the analysis. Thank you Pictureuploader (talk) 08:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)