> djh: > I don't know I haven't been reading David Morey. But I'm not saying there is > only 'good reasons' in science to make assumptions. I'm saying that there > are good reasons (and we actually do this all the time) to make assumptions > that things exist before we experience them in our daily lives.
> Marsha: > Provisionally this seems often to be the assumption. djh: And you're talking from some kind of God like perspective here? You never make these assumptions? Your statement is redundant, and tells us little about what you think. What do you Marsha or Lucy personally, think about this? Do you even like intellectual discussion? You appear not to enjoy intellectual discussion but the avoidance of it. > Marsha: > If assumptions were turtle, it's turtles all the way down. More redundancy and vagueness. What does the above sentence tell us about turtles or assumptions? I'll just ask you another question - Is there two contexts of the MOQ and how different are they? And does the strength of the contrast between the two contexts add to the strength of the MOQ? Or is it best to blur the lines between the two contexts so they become one? 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/md/archives.html
