On 12/28/2012 4:09 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/28/2012 1:29 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/28/2012 4:45 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi meekerdb
Can you suggest a scientific method to prove or disprove
the solipsism puzzle ?

Everybody solves it by the scientific method: they observe other people, they create a model in which other people are like themselves, they test the model and it works. Problem solved - except for people who don't know what the scientific method is.

Hi Brent,

This is how things actually work! We don't need to have an exact definition of this or that, we operate with FAPP models and 'as if' definitions, we don't need exactness, so why is it treated as so important? I invite you to check out any of Jon Barwise' books, I like/The Liar/ <http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?verb=Display&version=1.0&service=UI&handle=euclid.bams/1183555025&page=record> the most. It is a nice change of pace from the ordinary treatments of logic and semantics and might help you understand this issue of 'as if'.

What makes you think I don't understand it?


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to