--- On Sun, 11/29/09, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: archytas <[email protected]> > Subject: [epistemology 11021] Re: Different points of view. > To: "Epistemology" <[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009, 2:33 PM > Sadly Georges, one can play these > idiot games with words at will and > choose meaning in them having failed to grok the > other's. ============= G: One may, I don't. Meaning of a concept it's the structure of perceived/ recalled events, a point. So, it's given and there is nothing to choose, unless one wants to lie to himself. ============= Neil: We wouldn't > know truth if we met it, should it be possible to > achieve. =============== G: Sure we wouldn't, as there ain't no sich animal as truth. =============== Neil: You ask > the usual questions about holes, though these have long > been > answered. Maybe you have lost your spade? =============== G: I did not ask any questions about holes, usual or otherwise. I just asked what you meant by "holes" ============== Neil: Has > the Higg's Field > replaced the Aether? ============== G: No. Knowing both you would not ask. ================ Neil: Does it bring about some new > notion of mass? ================ G: No. "Mass" stays a pure mathematical, abstract coefficient without any concrete physical meaning. BTW, what is its "old notion"? =============== Neil: > How is it possible to make one's mind up on theories of > tired light? ============== G: I don't know. I ignore them and, unlike most, hate to prattle about what I ignore. CHeers Georges. ============ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
