[Platt] That the universe has no purpose is as much a conjecture on your part as that it does have purpose is conjecture on mine. In other words, to claim you are honest and those who believe differently are not is pure arrogance.
[Case] I have not claimed that others are dishonest. I do not regard self delusion as dishonesty. But it does seem to me that burden of proof rests on those who claim there is a purpose. Obviously if you admit that the inorganic world is purposeful, you could claim any number of possible purposes. So I would think that in claiming a purpose for nature you have an obligation not only to show that there is any purpose at all, but that the purpose you envision is the True purpose. Maybe it is arrogance but I think the whole enterprise is vanity and chasing the wind. [Platt] Plenty of evidence for both if you are willing to look and keep an open mind. Just the fact that you and I are purposeful beings and are part of the universe belies the assertion that the universe is without purpose. As for psi effects, plenty of those around in scientific experiments, like the Princeton experiments mentioned before. [Case] How open does your mind need to be to see this stuff? If you leave your mind open long enough all manner of weirdness can come in. Take these psi effects you cited before. They seemed at best very small. They did not take certain variables into account. They could not be replicated, even in the lab that published the reports. That pretty well sums up the results of this kind of research. It is not that research in this area has not been done; it is that it has failed to produce even a trace of evidence. 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/
