Brent, thanks for your remarks - I usually value them - now I think you went a bit overboard.
*"...Radical agnosticism, like solipism, is impossible to act on..."* * * I presume you checked all knowable and not knowable cases to decide the 'impossibility'. How 'radical'? more than you find 'reasonable'? I try to be agnostic in order to free my mind for the unusual and so far unknown. But I recognize the possibility of such. I think that is a way of advancement. The other point: ...*to act on*...? is it a must? *"...tables and chairs..."? * Did you find some 'matter-like' in the ultimate dissection of matter? only if you call YOUR energy (??) matter. I prefer a 'mini-solipsism' adjusting all info about the world according to MY capbilities (genetic make-up) for MY world-image. Other people do it differently and have an un-identical world-image. I keep the 'origins' in my agnostic mass (mess?). On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:44 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/1/2013 12:34 PM, John Mikes wrote: > >> Telmo: >> I would not draw nth conclusions on a plain assumption. >> Particles (IMO) are explanatory presumptions upon (mostly math-phys) >> temporary explanatory 'understanding' of some phenomena we got. >> > > Tables and chairs are also explanatory presumptions for some experiences I > have. So are other people. Radical agnosticism, like solipism, is > impossible to act on. > > > So are the reasons for 'dacay' taken from the limited access we have so >> far. >> - The rest of it goes into the term RANDOM. >> 1000 years ago there was more 'random' than today. So was 'emergent' and >> 'unexplainable (not that all our today's explanations are 'perfect' (I do >> not use "true"). >> My agnostic view includes future explanations for - what we call - >> particulate decay (random in today's usage). >> If we suppose 'order' in the world - nothing is random. >> > > That reminds me of Kant's argument: If we assume there is justice, then > their must be an afterlife in which this life's injustices are redressed. > Instead of inventing an unobservable afterlife the simpler and more > obvious conclusion is that we were wrong when we assumed there is justice. *"...if we assume..."* please, don't. You may escape from questionable conclusions. JohnM > > Brent > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<everything-list%[email protected]> > . > To post to this group, send email to > everything-list@googlegroups.**com<[email protected]> > . > Visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/**group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en> > . > For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> > . > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
