On 19 May 2014 12:13, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/18/2014 4:23 PM, LizR wrote:
>
> On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote:
>>
>> On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
>>>
>>> So do you think there is so
On 5/18/2014 4:23 PM, LizR wrote:
On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote:
On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>
wrote:
On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
So do you thi
On Monday, May 19, 2014 12:23:58 AM UTC+1, Liz R wrote:
>
> On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb > wrote:
>
>> On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote:
>>
>> On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb >wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
>>>
>>> So do you think there is some merit in Kauff
On 17 May 2014 11:05, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote:
>
> On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb wrote:
>
>> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
>>
>> So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you
>> think it is possible to reason about "the Voi
I looked up Norm Levitt in Wikipedia -- the entry is rather sketchy. Do you
have any links or biblio entries I can follow up on? From what I did read
of him (opposing "new left" academic silliness) I am intrigued to find out
more.
On Friday, May 16, 2014 7:05:59 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>
> On 5
On 5/16/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote:
On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you think
it is
possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful
On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
>
> So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you
> think it is possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful? Or useful?
>
>
> Sure, it's possible to reason about anything. Whet
On 16 May 2014, at 06:18, LizR wrote:
"We have proved that the Void is One, because it certainly is not
Many."
Is there no possibility that the void might be None?
Not really. Not a void you can be conscious one or refer too. Well,
set theory obeys comprhension, but also reflection, whic
On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you think it is
possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful? Or useful?
Sure, it's possible to reason about anything. Whether you can arrive at something useful
is an open
So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you think
it is possible to reason about "the Void"? Or meaningful? Or useful?
In the article, Kauffman seems to telegraph right at the beginning that
everything that will follow is an exercise in deception, thanks to the old
Ta
On 5/15/2014 9:30 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
I don't get it. Please explain?
Are you making a joke, something on the order of "both of these guys are spouting such
metaphysical hogwash that the debate between them would be an even bigger yawnfest than
their articles in particular"?
It was
I don't get it. Please explain?
Are you making a joke, something on the order of "both of these guys are
spouting such metaphysical hogwash that the debate between them would be an
even bigger yawnfest than their articles in particular"? Or is it some
specific aspect of what each of them profe
"We have proved that the Void is One, because it certainly is not Many."
Is there no possibility that the void might be None?
On 16 May 2014 15:47, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/15/2014 6:45 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
>
>> A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might
>> app
On 5/15/2014 6:45 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might
appreciate:
http://www.imprint.co.uk/C&HK/vol7/kauffman_7-4.pdf
Thoughts? Objections?
I can hardly wait to hear the Kauffman vs William Lane Craig debate.
Brent
--
You rece
A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might
appreciate:
http://www.imprint.co.uk/C&HK/vol7/kauffman_7-4.pdf
Thoughts? Objections?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
15 matches
Mail list logo