Greetings,
BO:
DAVID wrote:
> Pirsig is not trying to marry MOQ to Bohr's philosophy, as Struan
> suggests. Instead he sees Bohr trying to rescue physics from absurdity.
> Pirsig believes his MOQ has provided concepts and other intelledtual
> tools that allow him to finish what Bohr could not. Bohr didn't refuse
> to speculate about what was beyond the threshold of observability, as
> Struan claims. He couldn't find the words and concepts to come to any
> translatable conclusions, but Heisenberg testifies to Bohr's persistent
> and passionate speculations.
BO:
"I agree. Not (only) because you gave Struan a lesson, but because you
have seen the MOQ solution to the quandary. I think we have a pretty
good consensus about this matter ....for the first time in our
annals. :-)"
First time in your anals more like!
What I actually said was, "Those who want to marry QUANTUM PHYSICS with the MoQ will
have to
reformulate this aspect completely."
Spot the subtle difference in argument!! Inventing bones of contention merely raises
questions about
your motivation to which the answers are reasonably obvious.
Part of being constructive and relevant involves us all reading what others say, then
thinking and
checking our reply before we actually send it. There is no excuse for such a basic
flaw. Integrity
and accuracy are quite important on this kind of forum so please desist from abusing
it.
Thank you
Struan
------------------------------------------
Struan Hellier
< mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
purified in the process."
(Iris Murdoch)
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
