On 2/4/2014 1:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Feb 2014, at 21:57, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/3/2014 12:23 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Brent and Bruno here is the main question: what would you identify*"REALITY*"
by?
Reality is that which we hope to approach
OK
by reification of the ontology of our best theories.
Why? I think it is better to never reify anything in science. We can do it *for all
practical purposes* in our everyday life, but not in science, where reification and
ontological commitment leads to the stopping of progress and questioning.
Even scientific theology cannot/should not reify a creator or a creation. But we can
assume them, for the purpose of some argumentation.
Intimate conviction have to remain intimate. It is for the pause-café, or the sunday
philosophy.
I don't think of reification as a dogmatic committment. It's just the provisional
acceptance of the ontology of a theory.
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
