On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 04:28:51PM -0700, Brent Meeker wrote: > > I don't see that "relexive" adding anything here. It's just "existence" > simpliciter isn't it? >
Brent, all that David is getting at is saying nothing "reflexively exists" without being observed. The tree falling unobserved in the forest does not exist reflexively, but may exist in other senses of the word. It seems quite a useful concept - I may have called it anthropic existence elsewhere, but it doesn't seem to have an accepted name. Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
