<Therefore, there is no way to
account for these differences in perception unless I am actually
creating you. How could it be any differently?>

I am still wrestling with how you are using the word "create" Jim.  If
you mean that you are creating your own perspective or impression of a
person inside your own mind then I understand.  People's different
perspectives on another person are easy to account for without
claiming to "create" the person, right?






--- In [email protected], "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > > But that's what's so interesting to me--not *whether*
> > > > one or the other is true, but the fact that we can't
> > > > tell, that we can never know the most fundamental
> > > > fact of ontology.
> > > 
> > > I think we can tell which view is true. Occams Razor,
> > > why weigh down observable reality with an invented
> > > version of reality far more complex than it needs to be?
> > 
> > But Occam's razor tells us which version is *more
> > likely* to be true; it doesn't tell us which *is* true.
> > 
> > > Same with God, I can't see that it's up to anyone to
> > > disprove it but for the believers to prove the rest of
> > > us are wrong.
> > 
> > Again, the point is that you can neither prove *nor*
> > disprove either solipsism or realism.
> > 
> >  I'm a realist so I'll stick with assuming
> > > you and everyone else is actually here and not part of 
> > > my daydreams.
> > 
> > As long as you realize it's only an assumption...
> >
> and the point really isn't "is it real or a daydream?"-- that 
> polarizes the choices and makes the choice obvious, even to a child. 
> Rather the point is, you are real and have attributes that I 
> observe, and my observation of you is guided by my perception. In 
> other words I will see you differently, even by some miniscule 
> fraction, than the next person will. Therefore, there is no way to 
> account for these differences in perception unless I am actually 
> creating you. How could it be any differently?
>


Reply via email to