On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 1:37 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote:
> *Wheeler's answer explains nothing,* *I think it explains a great deal, especially considering the fact that it's only 13 words long. * *> **just repeating what EFE says**, * *Maybe, maybe not. Google says EFE is a Spanish news agency, but I don't know if that's what you meant. And by the way, IHA.* *>There could be an unlimited sequence of "why's", * *Yes there could be. * *> or the sequence might terminate in profound knowledge, but likely NOT in > an event without a cause, * *That doesn't make any sense. If the sequence terminates in X then wouldn't you want to know WHY it terminates in X ? If X is "NOT in an event without a cause" then you'd want to know what sort of thing DID cause X, and how and why it did so; therefore the sequence of "why" questions does NOT terminate with X.* *John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* ede -- 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 view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3_D_w765PH3Qg1nZAAW9%3D_cb%3D7Xob6o9nK0ySjmnhuTw%40mail.gmail.com.
