----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: The Mercies of The Vatican


> On Aug 25, 2004, at 4:40 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> >>> Differing with their unfounded assumptions is just irrational :-)
> >>
> >> No, but differing with reality is. :D
> >
> > Hmm, how do I differ with reality?
>
> Where did I say you did?

We differ.  I was referring to assumptions of yours that I differ with.
You responded to my reference with

 "No, but differing with reality is. :D"

Was I supposed to interpret this as simply a random statement that had no
relationship with my statement?  I interpreted it as a reply to my
statement.  Why would this be wrong?

> > From where do you get your sure knowledge of what is real and what is
> > not.
>
> Where did I say I had such sure knowledge?

Again, in the context of our exchange, the clear meaning of the text was
that my difference with you was a difference with reality.



> > For example, do you think that
> > electrons are things that exist apart from human consciousness?  What
> > about
> > partons?
>
> Electrons are mythical; partons, on the other hand, are not. I went to
> Dollywood last month so I know that for a fact.

OK, do atoms exist apart from humans.  How small a scale do you need to get
to before reality ends?

Dan M.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to