On Feb 7, 8:26 pm, Hal Ruhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi John:
>
> I think the idea before was to provide an acronym
> list and also give each person or like minded
> group a limit of a few pages in the FAQ document
> in which to present a summary of their point of view.
>
> Hal Ruhl
I think t
Hi John:
I think the idea before was to provide an acronym
list and also give each person or like minded
group a limit of a few pages in the FAQ document
in which to present a summary of their point of view.
Hal Ruhl
At 11:59 AM 2/7/2007, you wrote:
>Hal:
>you really believe that anybody coul
I don't "know" a right position from a wrong one either, I'm only trying to
make the best guess I can given the evidence. Sometimes I really have no idea,
like choosing which way a tossed coin will come up. Other times I do have
evidence on which to base a belief, such as the belief that the wo
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 06:10:34PM -0500, John M wrote:
>
> I can't wait for Bruno's (and others') versions.
>
> John M
>
My take on physical and existence.
Physical: that which "kicks back" in the Samuel Johnson sense. It
doesn't rule out idealism, because the virtual reality in a VR
simula
And you, Stathis, are very kind to assume that I "know' a right position from a
wromng one. I may be in indecision before I denigrate...
On the contrary. if someone 'believes' the 6 day creation, I start speculating
WHAT "days" they could have been metaphorically, starfting before the solar
syst
Mark:
fascinating. I like to ask such stupid questions myself.
On my question 'what is consciousness' the best answer I got was: "everybody
knows it" from a prof-fessional.
(Yes, but everybody knows it differently).
Existence??? I wonder how the honored listers will vote, I would resort to "the
By who's logic?
John M
- Original Message -
From: Torgny Tholerus
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: Searles' Fundamental Error
Brent Meeker skrev:
> Torgny Tholerus wrote:
>
>> Mark Peaty skrev:
>>
Torgny Tholerus wrote:
> Brent Meeker skrev:
>> Torgny Tholerus wrote:
>>
>>> Mark Peaty skrev:
>>>
And next: what do you mean by 'exist'?
>>> 'Exist' is exactly the same as 'mathematical possibility'.
>>>
>>> Our Universe is a mathemathical possibility. That is why our U
Brent Meeker skrev:
> Torgny Tholerus wrote:
>
>> Mark Peaty skrev:
>>
>>> And next: what do you mean by 'exist'?
>>>
>> 'Exist' is exactly the same as 'mathematical possibility'.
>>
>> Our Universe is a mathemathical possibility. That is why our Universe
>> exists. Every mathema
Torgny Tholerus wrote:
> Mark Peaty skrev:
>> And next: what do you mean by 'exist'?
> 'Exist' is exactly the same as 'mathematical possibility'.
>
> Our Universe is a mathemathical possibility. That is why our Universe
> exists. Every mathematically possible Universe exists in the same way.
Hal:
you really believe that anybody could provide responses acceptable for all
others? (I did not say understandable")
Everybody sits in his own mindset and speaks his own scientific religion
(=scientific belief system) - [said so, whether I aggraveted now (again)
Russell or not.]
We are in
Mark Peaty skrev:
And next: what do you mean by 'exist'?
'Exist' is exactly the same as 'mathematical possibility'.
Our Universe is a mathemathical possibility. That is why our Universe
exists. Every mathematically possible Universe exists in the same
way. But we can not get in touch
Bruno: 'Dont hesitate to ask why, I am sure few people have understand
the whole point. Some are close to it, perhaps by having figure this out
by themselves.'
MP: Don't look at me boss ... I'm just glad I don't have to understand
'it' to be able to exist within it!
SO, yes I will ask: What do
13 matches
Mail list logo
