-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sat, 13 May 2000, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> One way is to try to establish common ground. For example, many people agree
> that 'everything' should only include that which is logically possible (so
> round squares are excluded). If this is agreed, then it is reasonable to
> suppose, as at least a first approximation, that each entity or world that
> exists should be formally describable in some way, in principle.
This is disappointing. I think metaphysics can become quite
boring, but limiting discussions when there is an interest
seems like a crime.
I've been showing my friends square circles since I was in
highschool. It's all relative perception.
> One can then build from there. For example, one can apply formal systems to
> record these descriptions. Note that this still permits worlds that include
> all manner of gods, demons, topologies, and philosophical dualisms such as
> separate mental and physical realms. The fascinating thing is that it turns
> out that there are strong indications that although there are many worlds
> where such features/entities exist, we are not in one of them.
Um. Ok. I've been trying over and over to be in one of the multiverses
where JH has enough TIME to explain to me why he doesn't believe in
TIME. Yet, he always says he doesn't have enough TIME to respond to me.
I have not bothered to try to decipher his intent other than at the
surface level.
Is anyone else here now or even been in one of JH's multiverses where he
has enough TIME to explain himself beyond cryptic references to past
(pseudo)science?
Scott
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBOR2uc1pGPE+AF6qBAQH2GAP+ILv8i3OLOdwFCT+BXbj9nYP/UQs8lSP0
A8EyRgDPWzMwtKjjUQo2f8WO6VoP71EFnkOJjHgUm6pyDNFjpg/i24mJ4Xj/nPl8
RtXsrrvMRQvG+0gy9ljV9R2GYFD+5cfCFA4gj3scm8oJ4kqbKNFdFUG56qCA1qot
7rCF0FxPTOY=
=LiXQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Sat May 13 2000 - 12:45:12 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST