> You are a devout debater dear David and agreement would end > the discussion, but if you deny that complicated explanations are > results of wrong premises you are just silly. The famous > paradoxes of Greek physics dissolved in the light of the > Newtonian premises*, but if physics should have kept the former > for the sake of a "rounded view" - whatever that is - phew! >
DM: Funny thing is I started this line of criticism about historical causality not natural scientific. But natural scientific explanation are always simplifications because they pull out key features of a process-situation and exclude others that over complicate the causality. Bo:> Well, yours is a most level-headed view, but all intellect. Judaism > and Islam do not mix politics and religion because the social level > doesn't recognize them. DM: Politics is all about how we live together, at one time custom and religion ran social life, but power elites are present too and they have used religion as a tool. How else could we describe the aristocracy? I see more factors in this mix than you seem to recognise. I can accept useful models as long as they admit their limitations. Try it. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
