Re: this very moment

From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 10:47:07 -0700

James Higgo wrote:

> An extravagant claim is one that requires you to believe more, rather than
> fewer, unproven or unprovable theses. Your scheme below, what I understand
> of it, makes a series of assumptions which I have no need of. There really
> is no necessity for a thinker to have a thought, any more than there is a
> necessity for a watchmaker to make a watch. That is probably the most common
> fallacy that exists, and it is what prevents almost everyone from
> understanding what we are saying here.

Perhaps what prevents almost everyone from understanding what you are saying is
that you assign to words like 'exist' and 'idea' non-standard meanings
which are not explained. It would seem by your reckoning that the least
extravagant claim regarding the universe would be "God did it." since that
requires you to believe only one unprovable thesis. That does not however not make
it and interesting claim; since it explains everything and predicts nothing.
One could just as well say that claim is more extravagant which posits the
existence of more unknown and unknowable things - in which case limiting
'ideas' to 'things thought of by someone' is less extravagant than claiming
that all ideas exist.

When someone disagrees with you, you should not assume
that they entertain a fallacy. In such a slippery subject definitions can be
hard to come by and using words to have special meanings - although necessary -
may lead to misunderstanding when those special meanings are not shared.

You did not comment on neutral monism - which seems to me to require fewer
assumptions and has more explanatory power than idealism. It explains why
there is a material world as well as a mental one. It seems to me that
idealism requires extra assumptions about ideas in order that a material world
be perceived as we do.

Brent Meeker

On 12-May-00, Higgo James wrote:
Received on Fri May 12 2000 - 11:52:12 PDT