On Friday, April 29, 2011 8:22:17 AM UTC-4, ornamentalmind wrote:
>
> Rethinking it, perhaps you are asking about physicality? I just don't
> know for sure...sorry. In either case Ash, perhaps you could be real
> specific in the question. These epistemological and ontological issues
> get very deep very quickly and countless books have been written about
> even small aspects of these larger issues.
>
Sorry to jump the gun on you OM, I was hoping that instead of going back and
forth with "yes it is" "no it isn't" for several posts you could get a
competing assertion on the table. The suspense was killing me. I am willing
to do the foot in mouth routine if I've stepped on the dialogue here, it is
known that I can be inept at the social interplay and dance.
"But neuron(s) firing is." [a thought] - CB
No, it isn't.- OM
I think this pair of assertions has appeared at least twice in a row now,
Chuck has provided his initial rationale for this assertion and I would like
to know what is behind your. That's all.
>
> On Apr 29, 5:11 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Ash, first it would be helpful if you included a small snippet of the
> > specific post you are addressing for clarity's sake. This way we know
> > more of what you are responding to.
> >
> > In this particular case, I'm guessing you are asking me something
> > about thinking right? Not being sure, I'll await a specific question.
> >
> > On Apr 28, 7:57 pm, Ash <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Can you provide a better explanation OM? Not just the point but a
> useful bit
> > > to put this in perspective. It is obvious that you have something in
> mind,
> > > someone should ask..
