\I don't see relevance in your example. I do not argue against singling out 
ONE number amongst all, I argue against singling out numbers amongst 
nuimbers AND non-numbers.

In this sense numbers make sense only in relation with  non-numbers.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruno Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Bruno's argument

Le 17-juil.-06, à 20:54, John M a écrit :

> In my 'wholistic' (not 'holistic!) 'taste' (<:I don't
> call my narrative a worldview or hypo or theory:>) the
> entire interconnection generates ANY further item
> (step in any process) with no excludability of any.
> One cannot pick ONE without tacitly including all
> others.

The same with numbers, I note in passing. You cannot believe in all
numbers except this one.
The number 17 exists only in relation with all the other numbers, in
some sense. I would say the mathematical truth is wholistic. Perhaps
even holistic ?


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/390 - Release Date: 7/17/2006

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to