> I think this is wrongheaded. You doubt that you really assume "things are > how they appear to me" - the Earth appears flat, wood appears solid, and > electrons don't appear at all. What one does is build, or learn, a model > that fits the world and comports with "how they appear". I see no reason > not to call this model "reality", recognizing that it is provisional, > because there's no point in speculating about a "really, real reality" > except to suppose there is one so that the model is a model *of* something. And so that the model can be corrected, and so that reality doesn't disappear when the model does....actually , there are aquire a lot of reasons for believing in reality. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
