On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Brent Meeker <meeke...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> On 11/28/2010 8:15 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
> Things might be that way. But this requires an explanation of the
> existence of the information and the interpreter. And then an
> explanation of the explanation. And then an explanation of the
> explanation of the explanation. And so on.
> Down the rabbit hole of infinite regress. Doesn’t seem promising, and
> doesn’t seem necessary.
> Why not just accept accidental idealism?
> Maybe I would if you could explain it.
Which part do you not understand?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at