> My goodness Mark you are not in the best of spirits these days.
On the contrary, I'm in excellent spirits, so there.
The
> seminar was too
> academic for my taste, not enough what is to be done thinking, but
> nonetheless quite
> useful. There is nothing pathetic in getting people to think about the
> issues any more
> than it is pathetic to read about them on some CrashList.
Foster, on that showing, is a self-serving apolitical cop-out, who not only doesn't
understand 'the issues' but doesn't even understand the philosophy he's allegedly
discussing. Tragically (given his conclusions and orientations) the only person who
*did* show any real understanding of the philosophical questions Foster
absent-mindedly raised concerning chance, necessity and determinism, on that
seminar, was J Barkley Rosser, who at least looked like a scholar. Foster (sorry and
all that) is simply a dimwit who talks about 'ontology' and 'epistemology' without
any sign he has a clue what the terms even mean.
That wouldn't matter, if he was serious about saving the planet but he isn't, is he?
Please, don't bother answering here. I don't want to discuss Foster on Crashlist. No
time to waste, boyo. Get with the programme.
Mark
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
