Re: CHAT: What statement?

From: Ross A. Finlayson (raf@tiki-lounge.com)
Date: Thu Apr 05 2001 - 11:51:58 MDT


You can't ignore me.

J. R. Molloy wrote:

> From: "Ross A. Finlayson" <raf@tiki-lounge.com>
> > Those are not "useless".
>
> I've no use for them.
> What use do you have for them?
>

Others have use for them. Are you an objectionist?

>
> > If that were so, then eternity would be engulfed in actual chaos. It is not
> > so.
>
> Please define "actual chaos."
> (Sounds a lot like another useless hypothesis.)
>
> τΏτ
>
> --J. R.
>
> Useless hypotheses:
> consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
> analog computing
>
> Everything that can happen has already happened, not just once, but an
> infinite number of times, and will continue to do so forever.

I can actually define physical reality.

Ross

--
Ross Andrew Finlayson
Finlayson Consulting
Ross at Tiki-Lounge: http://www.tiki-lounge.com/~raf/
"It's always one more."  - Internet multi-player computer game player



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:44 MDT