John M a écrit : > > to more recent posts: > > 1. do we have a REAL argument against solipsism?
I am not sure to understand what you mean by "REAL" here. There are arguments against solipsism. Wittgenstein for instance produced some. None of them is lilkey to be decisive. They may work with some people and not with other people. Like any argument about anything if one digs enough I think. Like all the arguments I produced in this discussion. Arguments are just arguments. > 2. Is reasonable or rational thinking exclusive for > ONLY those, who live in a 'numbers' obsession? Certainly not. I am not sure that "reasonable or rational thinking" is something very well defined either. On my side, I often mention that I am considering and presenting *conjectures* or *speculations*. I do not require anybody to believe them or even to find sense in them (I find sense in them but I am not sure I need to believe them anyway). > or is it an elitist heaughtiness to look down to all, > who do not share such obsession? How about vice versa? I certainly do not think that my way of thinking or of seeing/understanding things is superior in any way to the one or other people. I do not feel obsessed by numbers by the way. I am just considering seriously (I just mean as possibly making sense) the four conjectures I mentionned as well as the associated developments I made. I am very well aware of the fact that all this is likely to appear highly ridiculous to most people and even dangerous to a few people. > 3. Suppose the 'numbers based' worldview gains > universal approval (by ~3006?) I would say "nope". Even by 3006. And I don't worry at all about that. > -what will that help in the betterment of the world? I don't know. In case it would not, are you suggesting we'd better refrain using our freedom of thinking and freedom of expression when it comes to such speculations? (that must be what I meant when I mentionned that a few people are likely to consider such way of thinking as dangerous). > or even in the betterment of human thinking? I can't figure on which groud one could say that some human thinking would be better than another. > Or even of more civil general life- conditions? Again I don't know and again, in case it would not, are you suggesting we'd better refrain using our freedom of thinking and freedom of expression when it comes to such speculations? Georges. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" 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/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
