> THE BRAIN is wider than the sky,
> For, put them side by side,
> The one the other will include
> With ease, and you beside.
>-Emily Dickinson

In all of the history of humans' exploration of the universe, the
perpetual message that keeps coming back to us from the universe is
that the brain is not as wide as the sky.  I think that trying to make
an "end run" around "everything" and starting with the doctrine that it
is, is not a new thing (even to the ancient Greeks), but it contradicts
the evidence.

> *Given* that we want a metaphysical 'Theory Of Everything' (the name of this mailing list after all!) we must *assume* as a starting point that mind can comprehend reality.  Our assumption could be wrong.  That's why it's called a *theory* of everything ;) 
Why couldn't the theory be that the mind can comprehend reality, but not all of reality.  Wouldn't that be a theory of everything?  What if that's the actual truth?  We would be doing ourselves a disservice by theorizing otherwise.

And I'm saying (see above) that the evidence is against the assumption that the mind can comprehend everything.  The message we get from the universe is that its paradigm is always beyond our minds.

Reply via email to