> [Krimel] > So you would summarize Pirsig as saying that because regular folks can not > understand something it must be wrong?
[Platt] Not wrong, but questionable. [Krimel] Happily we have some of our brightest and best seeking answers. I think we owe them the courtesy of paying attention to the extent that we are able. > [Krimel] > It is one thing to say you disagee > and provide a reasoned disagreement. But if in your disagreement you show > clear evidence of misunderstanding it is hard to take the disagreement > seriously. [Platt] That was Pirsig's and Poincare's point: the scientific explanation for the origin of existence is not something regular folks like me can understand. So it's questionable. I don't think Pirsig and Poincare are dummies. Do you? [Krimel] I suspect Poincare's lament was not intended to discredit the enterprise of science nor to dismiss it. Whether regular folks can grasp scientific cosmology or not, I can not say. However, Dennett makes the point that Darwin is dangerous because he is so easy for regular folks to understand. It would seem you and who ever is on your team have problems either way. You dismiss one because it can't be understood and the other because it can. 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/
