On Apr 27, 9:16 pm, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 4/27/2012 12:00 PM, 1Z wrote:
> > On Apr 27, 7:13 pm, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > We never explained where the elan vital was or where it came
> >> from. We just came up with a different kind of 'explanation'.
> > And the EV is supposed to be analgous to qualia? But that paralell
> > doens;t work. The EV is dismissable
> > because there was never prima facie evidence for it.
> Then why was it widely believed to exist?...because somethings were alive and
> seemingly identical things weren't.
And EV was an explanation for that, and it was supposed to be a hidden
factor that caused it, not something
open to view itself.
> > However, qualia
> > are prima facie evidence for everything
> > else. I can;t just pretend that my pains don't hurt, etc.
> We don't pretend things aren't alive either.
Oh sure. Moving around and breathing is PF evidence for life. But then
the parallel is between qualia and life, not between qualia and EV.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at