> I think this is wrongheaded. You doubt that you really assume "things are
> how they appear to me" - the Earth appears flat, wood appears solid, and
> electrons don't appear at all. What one does is build, or learn, a model
> that fits the world and comports with "how they appear". I see no reason
> not to call this model "reality", recognizing that it is provisional,
> because there's no point in speculating about a "really, real reality"
> except to suppose there is one so that the model is a model *of* something.
And so that the model can be corrected, and so that reality doesn't
disappear when the model does....actually , there are
aquire a lot of reasons for believing in reality.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sat Aug 12 2006 - 12:37:01 PDT