On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 12:02 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 7/8/2011 8:08 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:01 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On 7/8/2011 7:35 PM, Constantine Pseudonymous wrote:
>>> it makes so much sense.....
>>> the doctrine of physicalism is in the least on the same plane as any
>>> idealistic metaphysics, especially some form of objective idealism.
>>> But in my eye… the fairer judgment is that some form of idealistic
>>> metaphysics is in fact situated a step above physicalism in
>>> probability and satisfactory of coherence.
>> And has idealistic metaphysics ever made a successful prediction or
>> informed a useful product?
> Metaphysics has nothing to do with prediction. Metaphysics is about
> interpretation and meaning.
> But the metaphysics of materialism has been the philosophical guide of
> science since the renaissance. Idealism has been the metaphysics of mystics
> and charlatans.
Association fallacy, I think.
> In other words: What do we make of the fact that these predictions were
> successful (or not)? What does this mean with respect to our beliefs about
> what kinds of things exist?
> The things we take to exist are the elements of our successful models.
"We" who? Not me.
Argumentum ad populum?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at