Arne Kjellman wrote:"... And as I have told you before - unless you can resolve the REALIST'S DILEMMA I can see no sound reason for me converting to realism - and neither for you being one, no matter how many mantras you are able to produce."Arne, I think you are hopelessly sinking into
Dear Arne,
I count myself as a realist and, to paraphrase your statement, I see any
reason in what you wrote to convert me. Your points about limitations and
biases of the mind regarding our understanding of reality are good ones, and
I think it is important for realists to keep these cautions
Richard,
thank you that you invite me to explain more on the S-C-S mantra. Hope that
Pedro and the readers of this chat are not bored.
Your questiona:
Karl, this is interesting to me. Maybe the principle I seek is your
sequential-commutative-sequential mantra. I'm sure you know that
it
Dear List,
I wish to add a simple observation concerning the discussion of
realism and Arne's complete rejection of it. I advocate the solipsism
of logical positivism and place semeiotics first among sciences but I
consider Arne's rejection of realism to be incorrect, it fails to
allow
Karl:I fear that I must once again disagree with your strong conclusions about the relations between mathematics and genetics. I would urge you to attempt to find exact correspondence relations between empirical evidence and your views of models based on numbers.From: "Karl Javorszky" [EMAIL
