Cheerskep wrote: > In fact the notion I had in mind with 'weightless' was one of > "light-weight", "trifling", inconsiderable. With almost every interesting word I > encountered in philosophy -- like 'cause', 'meaning', 'belief' -- my initial > notions in Philosophy 101 were all those demeaning adjectives.
Okay, now I get it. "Weightless" signifies "weight," albeit only the light kind of weight. Why dincha say that?! > And I suspect > Michael knew I did not think of 'weightless' as "no thing". So I cannot take him > seriously here. In sum, I think Michael's objection to my use of > 'weightless' is, call it, weightless. Well, geez-o, Tom, the little <g> Internet G-spot should have been a give-away. Here's another one: <g> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Michael Brady
